INTRODUCTION

Jurisdiction in itself plays a very vital role in understanding the entire legal diaspora, it explains the powers and authority of each court, and thus further brings on the clarity regarding the entire approach for any sorts of judicial proceedings.  

So, jurisdiction in simpler words can be defined as the authority of the court to hear and determine cases. In the case of Hriday Nath Roy v. Ram Chandra1, the bench observed that: 

‘An examination of the cases in the books discloses numerous attempts to define the term ‘jurisdiction’, which has been stated to be ‘the power to hear and determine issues of law and fact;’ ‘the authority by which three judicial officers take cognizance of and decide cause;’ ‘the authority to hear and decide a legal controversy;’ ‘the power to hear and determine the subject-matter in controversy between parties to a suit and to adjudicate or exercise any judicial power over them; ’the power to hear, determine and pronounce judgment on the issues before the Court; ’the power or authority which is conferred upon a Court by the Legislature to hear and determine causes between parties and to carry the judgments into effect;’ ‘the power to enquire into the facts, to apply the law, to pronounce the judgment and to carry it into execution.’ 

Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) is the key Indian legislation dealing with the entire procedure of criminal law in our country. There are also definitive classes of criminal courts in the country forming the hierarchy. Following are the different classes of criminal courts in India: (top to bottom) 

  1. Supreme Court. 

  2.High Court 

  3.Sessions Court (also called Court of Session). 

  4. Judicial Magistrates of First Class (called Metropolitan Magistrates in metropolitan areas). 

  5.Judicial Magistrates of Second Class. 

  6.Executive Magistrates. 

There are several kinds of jurisdiction ascertaining the power the of the courts and also regarding court of first appeal or trial, herein we would be discussing about Original, Appellate and Revisional Jurisdiction. 

Original Jurisdiction  

Original jurisdiction primarily means the power or authority to hear or adjudge a case for the first time, unlike Appellate jurisdiction wherein a higher court reviews the validity of the judgement passed by a lower court.  

According to Section 209, a Magistrate takes cognizance of a crime- 

“When in a case instituted on a police report or otherwise, the accused appears or is brought before the Magistrate” 

Magistrate further ascertains that whether the said case is triable exclusively by the sessions court, the accused thus is subject to all the provisions of CrPC. 

 Articles 233-237 deals with the establishment of subordinate courts. The Sessions Court is established under Section 9 of the CrPC. 

Section 9: “1. The State Government shall establish a Court of Session for every session division. 2.Every Court of Session shall be presided over by a Judge, to be appointed by the High Court.” 

 From Section 225 through Section 237, the procedure for a trial before a Court of Session is outlined. The Sessions Court is a first-instance court that hears severe criminal cases. In Sessions Court, there is a set of rules that must be followed during the trial. 

Then moving further, except for the Supreme Court of India, only High Courts have writ jurisdiction to enforce basic rights. In contrast to the Supreme Court of India, these writs may be executed for purposes other than protecting basic rights under Article 226 of the Indian Constitution. As a result, this specific jurisdiction of the high court is far greater than the Supreme Court of India's. 

In Bandhua Mukti Morcha v.  Union of India2 (1984), “it was held that Article 226 has a much broader scope than Article 32, as it gives the High Courts the power to issue orders, directions, and writs not only for the enforcement of fundamental rights but also for the enforcement of legal rights that are granted to the disadvantaged by statute and are just as important as the fundamental rights.” 

Article 226 : “Notwithstanding anything in article 32, every High Court shall have power, throughout the territories in relation to which it exercises jurisdiction, to issue to any person or authority, including in appropriate cases any Government, within those territories directions, orders or writs, including writs in the nature of habeas corpus, mandamus, prohibition, quo warranto and certiorari, or any of them, for the enforcement of any of the rights conferred by Part III and for any other purpose”. 

It gives the high court the ability to issue instructions, orders, and writs to any person or authority, including the government. The circumstances thereof shall be exceptional and crucial.  

The sessions court has a definite territory per se thus only has original jurisdiction over the respective cases of its territory, although the sessions court has the authority to give death penalty but it cannot be executed without the permit of the superintending High Court.   

Moving ahead understanding the original jurisdiction of the apex court we need to understand that Although the Supreme Court only has exclusive original jurisdiction over disputes involving the Government of India and one or more States, the Government of India and any State or States on one side and one or more States on the other, or between two or more States, if and to the extent that the dispute involves any question (whether of law or of fact) on which the existence or scope of a legal right depends,  Additionally, Article 32 of the Constitution grants the Supreme Court broad original jurisdiction over the enforcement of Fundamental Rights. It has the authority to issue directives, orders, or writs, including writs of quo warranto, prohibition, habeas corpus, mandamus and certiorari. 

Article 32: “The right to move the Supreme Court by appropriate proceedings for the enforcement of the rights conferred by this Part is guaranteed.” 

In Rashid Ahmad v. Municipal Board,3 “it was held that in relation to Fundamental Rights the availability of alternative remedy cannot be an absolute bar for the issue of writ though the fact may be taken into consideration.”  

 Thus, supreme court exercises its discretionary power in cases of miscarriage of justice. 

Now moving ahead with the second type. 

Appellate Jurisdiction   

The ability of a court to hear appeals from lower courts is referred to as appellate jurisdiction. It is the ability to overturn or amend a lower court's ruling which falls within its appellate authority. Criminal and civil law both have appellate jurisdiction.   

Because it has the authority to hear appeals against decisions made by Subordinate Courts within its territorial jurisdiction, the High Court is regarded as the principal court of appeal. It has the ability to exercise appellate jurisdiction over criminal cases. Criminal jurisdiction is exercised over the decisions made by the Sessions Court and Additional Sessions Court, as well as cases in which the death penalty was upheld and a seven-year sentence of imprisonment was given by Sessions Court prior to execution. (Mandatory approval) 

High Court orders of conviction issued while exercising original criminal jurisdiction have the right to be appealed to the Supreme Court. Conviction orders issued by the Court of Session or Additional Court of Session are appealable to the High Court while practising under section 374 of CrPC. 

Section 374: “Any person convicted on a trial held by a High Court in its extraordinary original criminal jurisdiction may appeal to the Supreme Court. 

 Any person convicted on a trial held by a Sessions Judge or an Additional Sessions Judge or on a trial held by any other court in which a sentence of imprisonment for more than seven years 1 [has been passed against him or against any other person convicted at the same trial], may appeal to the High Court.” 

Section 376 of CrPC explains how petitions cannot be made for petty crimes. 

Now let’s understand the appellate jurisdiction of the apex court deeply. Certificate of appeal grated by high court in itself is really important. In both civil and criminal cases involving significant legal issues pertaining to the interpretation of the Constitution, the Supreme Court's appellate jurisdiction may be exercised by means of a certificate issued by the High Court in question pursuant to Articles 132(1), 133(1), or 134 of the Constitution. If the High Court in a criminal case (a) overturned an order of acquittal of an accused person on appeal and sentenced him to death, life in prison, or a term of at least ten years, or (b) has withdrawn for trial before itself any case from any Court subordinate to its authority and has in such trial convicted the accused and sentenced him to death or to imprisonment for life or for a period of not less than 10 years, or (c) certified that the case is a fit one for appeal to the Supreme Court. 

Any additional authority to consider appeals from a High Court's criminal decision, final order, or sentence may be granted by Parliament to the Supreme Court. 

But Article 136 herein plays a very significant role, it explains that the powers of supreme court while chasing injustice is sky high, under exceptional circumstances the supreme court can grant special leave petition. 

The Supreme Court has extensive appellate jurisdiction over all courts and tribunals in India, as it may, at its discretion, grant special leave to appeal under Article 136 of the Constitution from any judgement, decree, determination, sentence, or order in any cause or matter passed or made by any court or tribunal within the territory of India. 

Supreme court may exercise this absolute power under exceptional circumstances. (Injustice or substantial question of law or crime against the society). 

The Supreme Court decided in Arun Kumar v. State of Uttar Pradesh4 (1989), “that the Allahabad High Court was right to overturn the Sessions Judge’s acquittal and convict the appellants if it determined that the Sessions Judge’s position was clearly erroneous and even contributed to a miscarriage of justice.”                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                

Revisional Jurisdiction  

The goal of revisional jurisdiction is to end serious and profound injustice. The revision provisions' aim is to fix a flaw in the law or a jurisdictional or legal error. It may not be appropriate for the court to investigate orders that, on the surface, show careful consideration and seem to be in line with the law. There must be a well-founded breach. When judgements are gravely incorrect, there is a violation of the law, the judgement is not supported by sufficient evidence, key evidence is omitted, or the judiciary's power is being used arbitrarily or perversely, revisional jurisdiction may be requested. 

Revision depends upon the discretion of the court whereas on the other side appeal is a constitutional right which makes these two very different, also under CrPC revision petition can only presented before sessions court or high court rather appeal is presented before superior court (it maybe any court.) 

Moving ahead let’s understand the power of revisional courts under section 397. 

 Section 397 : “The High Court or any Sessions Judge may call for and examine the record of any proceeding before any inferior Criminal Court situate within its or his local jurisdiction for the purpose of satisfying itself or himself; to the correctness, legality or propriety of any finding, sentence or order, recorded or passed, and as to the regularity of any proceedings of such inferior Court, and may, when calling, for such record, direct that the execution of any sentence or order be suspended, and if the accused is in confinement that he be released on bail or on his own bond pending the examination of the record.” 

 From the above section it can be gathered that, the high court or the court of session is given the authority to examine the record of any proceeding before any lower court under Section 397 in order to determine the following: The accuracy, legality, or wisdom of any order made by the lower court; or the consistency of any proceedings of such a court. 

The high court or court of session may also decide to defer the execution of any verdict or order and release the defendant on bail or his own bond while the case is being reviewed. The Code's Section 397 also gives revisional courts the authority to set bail.  

Lastly it can be said that the hierarchy of the courts has been established in a way that makes it simple for everybody living in this nation to visit the courthouse whenever a disagreement arises. When citizens feel that their rights have been violated by lesser courts, it gives them a platform to appeal to higher courts. India is a large country with a sizable population. Therefore, it is essential that the current judicial system thrive and streamline its procedures so that anybody can access it and ensure that all of the nation's residents receive justice.