Criminal Revision in Bangladesh: High Court and Sessions Revision (2026)

Criminal revision Bangladesh courts apply in 2026: the framework

Criminal revision Bangladesh courts exercise is the remedy for an order that is wrong in law, irregular in procedure or plainly unjust, and that cannot be corrected, or cannot be corrected in time, by an appeal. It is how an accused attacks an order framing charge, how a complainant challenges a discharge or the rejection of a naraji petition, and how the High Court Division keeps the Magistracy and the Sessions courts within the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898. The power is wide, but it is discretionary, and it is spent quickly: in most cases there is only one revision.

This guide sets out the 2026 position in full. It covers the statutory scheme in sections 435 to 442A of the Code, the revisional powers of the High Court Division and the Sessions Judge, the bar on a second revision, the orders that can and cannot be revised, limitation and delay, procedure and interim stays, how criminal revision differs from civil revision under section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, and what the Code of Criminal Procedure (Amendment) Act 2026 changed for revision practice. Where another TRW guide already covers a neighbouring remedy, we link to it rather than repeat it.

Summary: A criminal revision asks a superior court to examine the record of a subordinate criminal court and correct an incorrect, illegal or improper finding, sentence or order. The High Court Division and the Sessions Judge share the power under sections 435, 439 and 439A of the Code of Criminal Procedure. A party who loses a revision before the Sessions Judge cannot bring a second revision in the High Court Division, and a party who could have appealed but did not cannot use revision instead. No statute fixes a deadline, but a sixty-day practice applies in the High Court Division.

Key point: Choose the forum before you file. A revision decided by the Sessions Judge under section 439A is final for the applicant, and section 439(4) prevents the High Court Division from entertaining any revision against it. After that, only the narrow inherent jurisdiction under section 561A remains.

At a glance

Swipe or scroll →

Table of Contents

What criminal revision is and why it exists

Criminal revision is a supervisory jurisdiction, not a second appeal. Section 435 of the Code allows the High Court Division or any Sessions Judge to call for and examine the record of any proceeding before an inferior criminal court within its local limits, to satisfy itself as to the correctness, legality or propriety of any finding, sentence or order, and as to the regularity of the proceedings.[1] Correctness, legality and propriety reach further than jurisdictional error, but the court asks whether justice has miscarried, not whether it would have decided differently.

The High Court Division has explained the purpose in terms that are now routinely cited. Revisional power does not create any right in a litigant; it conserves the court's power to see that justice is done and that subordinate courts do not exceed or abuse their jurisdiction. Its object is a paternal or supervisory jurisdiction to correct miscarriage of justice arising from misconception of law, irregularity of procedure, neglect of proper precautions or apparent harshness of treatment.[4]

Who may invoke it

Because the power is supervisory, standing in criminal revision Bangladesh practice is broad. The High Court Division may act on an application by the accused or convicted person, by a complainant or other private person, or of its own motion on information from any source. A third person prejudiced by an order discharging an accused may apply, and a private party with no right of appeal may come in revision where the Anti-Corruption Commission or the government fails to appeal.[4]

What it is not

Revision is not a rehearing of the evidence, and a revisional court is not a second trial court. The court will not interfere merely because it might have come to a different conclusion on facts, and it will not correct mistakes in law that have no effect on the outcome.[4] Nor is it a substitute for appeal: section 439(5) provides that where an appeal lies and no appeal is brought, no revision shall be entertained at the instance of the party who could have appealed.[1]

Criminal revision Bangladesh law: sections 435 to 442A

The revisional chapter is short and has been reshaped several times; read it as it stands in 2026.

• Section 435 gives the High Court Division and any Sessions Judge the power to call for records and, when doing so, to suspend execution of a sentence and release a confined accused on bail or on his own bond pending examination. All Magistrates, executive or judicial, are deemed inferior to the Sessions Judge for this purpose.[1] The 2009 amendment removed the words that had given Chief Metropolitan Magistrates, District Magistrates and empowered Sub-divisional Magistrates a similar power.[1]
• Section 436 allows the High Court Division or the Sessions Judge to direct the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate or Chief Judicial Magistrate to make further inquiry into a complaint dismissed under section 203 or section 204(3), or into the case of an accused who has been discharged. No such direction may be made against a discharged person unless he has had an opportunity to show cause.[1]
• Sections 437 and 438 have been omitted, section 437 by the Law Reforms Ordinance 1978 and section 438 by the 2009 amendment with effect from 1 November 2007.[1]
• Section 439 sets out the High Court Division's revisional powers, considered below.
• Section 439A, inserted by the Law Reforms Ordinance 1978, gives the Sessions Judge the same powers and makes his decision final for the applicant.[1]
• Section 440 provides that no party has a right to be heard in revision, although the court may hear any party, without affecting the accused's right to be heard before an order to his prejudice.[1]
• Section 442 requires the High Court Division to certify its decision to the lower court, which must then make conforming orders and amend the record.[1]
• Section 442A directs a revisional court to dispose of a revision within ninety days of service of notice on the parties, counting working days only.[1]

Special statutes

Some special laws carry their own revisional provision. Orders of a Special Judge in corruption cases, for example, are revised by the High Court Division under section 10(1A) of the Criminal Law Amendment Act 1958, which the court applies on the same supervisory principles as sections 435 and 439.[4] Always check the statute under which the trial court sits before choosing the section to invoke.

Revisional powers of the High Court Division under section 439

Section 439(1) allows the High Court Division, in any proceeding whose record it has called for, which has been reported for orders, or which otherwise comes to its knowledge, to exercise any of the powers of a court of appeal under sections 423, 426, 427 and 428, or of a court under section 338, and to enhance the sentence. Where the judges are equally divided, the case is disposed of under section 429.[1]

Powers borrowed from the appellate court

The cross-reference to section 423 is what gives criminal revision its reach. On appeal from a conviction, section 423 allows the court to reverse the finding and sentence and acquit or discharge the accused, order a retrial, alter the finding, or reduce or alter the sentence.[1] The High Court Division has held that these powers are not exhaustive, that a revision admitted on sentence alone allows interference with conviction as well, and that its powers under section 439 cannot be fettered by the scope of the order calling for the record.[4]

Enhancement and the right to be heard

No order may be made to the prejudice of the accused unless he has had an opportunity to be heard personally or by a pleader.[1] Where the court proposes to enhance a sentence, section 439(6) entitles the convicted person to show cause against the conviction itself, not only against the enhancement. Where the sentence was passed by a Magistrate, section 439(3) caps any enhanced punishment at what a Metropolitan Magistrate or Magistrate of the first class could have imposed.[1]

The acquittal limit

Section 439(4) prevents the High Court Division from converting a finding of acquittal into one of conviction.[1] A complainant who challenges an acquittal in revision can therefore obtain, at most, an order setting the acquittal aside and directing a retrial or further inquiry. Where a direct right of appeal exists, section 417 is the better route: the government may appeal any acquittal, and a complainant may appeal an original acquittal in a complaint case within sixty days where the order involves an error of law occasioning failure of justice.[1]

Sentence suspension and bail pending revision

When the record is called for, section 435(1) allows the court to suspend execution of the sentence and release a confined accused on bail or on his own bond pending examination.[1] This is the revisional counterpart of bail pending appeal. Our guide to High Court bail in Bangladesh covers how the High Court Division approaches liberty applications generally.

Sessions Judge revision under section 439A

Since 1978 the Sessions Judge has held a revisional jurisdiction that mirrors the High Court Division's. Under section 439A(1), in any proceeding whose record he has called for or which otherwise comes to his knowledge, the Sessions Judge may exercise all or any of the powers of the High Court Division under section 439.[1] The Sessions Judge's power therefore extends to retrial, alteration of findings and, within the section 439(3) cap, enhancement.

Additional Sessions Judges and metropolitan courts

Under section 439A(3), an Additional Sessions Judge may exercise all the Sessions Judge's revisional powers in any case transferred to him by general or special order of the Sessions Judge.[1] In Dhaka and the other metropolitan areas, revisions against Metropolitan Magistrates are filed before the Metropolitan Sessions Judge and are often heard by an Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge on transfer, as in the Zahanara Begum litigation discussed below.[5]

Why most revisions start at the Sessions tier

The Sessions Judge sits in the district and is usually faster, so for a Magistrate's order a Sessions revision is the ordinary first step. The decision to file there, however, closes the High Court Division's revisional door, so the choice between the two forums is the most consequential decision in any criminal revision Bangladesh practitioners make.

The bar on a second criminal revision Bangladesh law imposes

Two provisions work together. Section 439A(2) provides that where an application for revision is made by or on behalf of any person before the Sessions Judge, his decision on it in relation to that person is final.[1] Section 439(4) then provides that nothing in section 439 authorises the High Court Division to entertain any proceeding in revision with respect to an order made by the Sessions Judge under section 439A.[1] The combined effect is a statutory bar on a second revision.

What the bar covers

The bar is tied to the revisional order of the Sessions Judge. It does not prevent a High Court Division revision against an order the Sessions Judge made in a different capacity, for example as trial court or as appellate court. In Md Nazmul Islam v The State, the High Court Division entertained a revision under sections 435 and 439 against a Sessions Judge's appellate judgment that had reversed an acquittal summarily without notice to the accused, contrary to section 422, and set it aside.[7] Equally, a revision against a Sessions Judge's order on bail may go directly to the High Court Division.[6]

Section 561A after a failed revision

Once the Sessions Judge has decided a revision, the only route to the High Court Division is its inherent jurisdiction under section 561A, which preserves the power to make orders necessary to give effect to any order under the Code, to prevent abuse of the process of any court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice.[1] In Zahanara Begum v The State the High Court Division held that a litigant may move under section 561A after exhausting section 439A if there is a cogent ground to prevent abuse of process or secure the ends of justice, but that the answer depends on significant material on the record; finding none, it discharged the Rule.[5]

Section 561A is not a disguised second revision, and the threshold is deliberately high. The grounds, the leading authorities and the procedure for quashing proceedings are set out in our separate guide to section 561A quashment in Bangladesh.

Which orders can be challenged in criminal revision

Section 435 speaks of "any finding, sentence or order" and the "regularity of any proceedings" of an inferior criminal court.[1] The Code contains no general bar on revising interlocutory orders. The practical limits come from section 439(5), from the finality of section 439A and from the court's own reluctance to interrupt a trial without good reason.

Orders framing charge

No appeal lies against an order framing charge, so revision is the ordinary remedy for an accused who says the materials do not disclose a prima facie case. The revisional court asks only whether the prosecution materials disclose a prima facie case for trial. In Mirza Abbas v The State, the High Court Division, citing the Appellate Division in Moudud Ahmed v The State, held that the existence of a prima facie case justifies framing charge, that the trial court is the sole authority to frame charge, and that disputed questions of fact must be resolved at trial; it discharged the Rule and directed the trial to conclude within six months.[4]

Orders of discharge

A Magistrate must discharge an accused where the charge is groundless under section 241A, and a Court of Session must do so where there is no sufficient ground for proceeding under section 265C.[1] A complainant or the State may challenge a discharge in revision, and section 436 allows the revisional court to direct further inquiry, but only after the discharged person has been given an opportunity to show cause.[1]

Dismissal of complaints and naraji petitions

Orders dismissing a complaint under section 203, or rejecting a naraji petition against a final police report, are commonly revised before the Sessions Judge. That was the route in Zahanara Begum, where the complainant's revision was rejected by an Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge before she moved the High Court Division under section 561A.[5]

Bail orders and other interlocutory orders

Orders granting or refusing bail, cancelling bail, refusing adjournments, recalling witnesses, or rejecting applications to examine documents are all orders of an inferior court within section 435. In Akhteruzzaman v The State, an informant brought a criminal revision against a District and Sessions Judge's order rejecting cancellation of bail in a murder case; the High Court Division stayed the impugned order for six months on issuing the Rule.[6] The more an interlocutory challenge looks like an attempt to stall the trial, the less likely the court is to interfere.

Convictions where no appeal lies

Where the Code gives no appeal, such as for the petty sentences in sections 413 and 414, section 439(5) does not apply and revision is the only remedy.[1] The 2026 amendment has enlarged this category, as explained below.

Grounds that persuade a revisional court

Because the power is discretionary, the strength of a revision depends on showing a miscarriage of justice, not merely an arguable error. The High Court Division has identified the situations in which interference is justified: where the trial court wrongly shut out evidence; where the appellate court wrongly held admissible evidence inadmissible; where material evidence was overlooked; where an acquittal rested on a compounding not permitted by law; and, generally, where a finding, sentence or order is incorrect, illegal or improper, or the proceedings are irregular.[4]

The same judgment explains the limits. The court will not always interfere even where an order is wrong in law or irregular, if no prejudice resulted; it will interfere to correct injustice, not mere illegality; and it will not disturb a rightly made order because the reasons given were inadequate.[4] The court generally does not go into facts, but may do so where the onus was wrongly placed, an incorrect principle was applied in deciding a question of fact, or a material piece of evidence was ignored.[4]

Procedural defects that succeed

Failures of notice and hearing are among the most reliable grounds. A Sessions Judge who allows an appeal against acquittal without notice to the accused acts contrary to section 422, and the High Court Division will set the order aside and direct a fresh hearing.[7] Orders made without jurisdiction, without recording reasons where the Code requires them, or in breach of a statutory precondition fall into the same class.

Limitation and delay in criminal revision Bangladesh practice

Neither the Code nor the Limitation Act 1908 prescribes a period for filing a criminal revision. As a matter of long-standing practice, the High Court Division applies the sixty-day period that Article 155 of the First Schedule to the Limitation Act fixes for criminal appeals to the High Court Division.[4] The court has also said that, in the interest of justice, there is no legal bar to entertaining a revision filed after sixty days, and that such an application cannot properly be called time-barred; the question is whether there has been gross negligence or inordinate delay.[4]

How to treat the deadline in practice

The flexibility is real, but no criminal revision Bangladesh lawyers file should rely on it. Treat sixty days from the date of the impugned order as the working deadline in both the High Court Division and the Sessions court, apply promptly for certified copies, and explain any delay day by day in the petition. The Appellate Division is strict on its own deadlines: in the Akhteruzzaman litigation it dismissed a criminal petition for leave to appeal that was out of time by 73 days because the explanation for the delay was unsatisfactory.[6]

Disposal time

Section 442A expects a revision to be disposed of within ninety working days of service of notice on the parties.[1] The figure is directory in practice. At 31 August 2026, 646,276 cases were pending in the High Court Division, even after it disposed of 87,596 cases in the first eight months of the year.[10] Revision strategy must assume that a Rule may be pending for longer than the statute contemplates.

Filing a criminal revision Bangladesh High Court Division practice

A revision in the High Court Division is filed as a petition under section 439 read with section 435, or under the special statute that applies, setting out the impugned order, the proceedings below, the grounds and the relief sought, with a certified copy of the order and the relevant parts of the record annexed.[4] The petition is moved before the bench with criminal revisional jurisdiction. If the bench is satisfied that the matter deserves examination, it issues a Rule calling on the opposite parties to show cause why the order should not be set aside, and may call for the lower court record.

The Rule and the hearing

Section 440 means no party has a right to be heard in revision, although the court may hear any party, and an accused must be heard before any order to his prejudice.[1] In practice the petitioner, the State through the Attorney General's office and the complainant or informant are heard on the Rule. A Rule is either made absolute, with the impugned order set aside or modified, or discharged, which revives the order and vacates any interim stay.[5]

Certification and compliance

Under section 442, the High Court Division certifies its decision to the lower court, which must make conforming orders and amend its record.[1] Filing before the Sessions Judge follows the same pattern at district level, with the petition presented to the Sessions Judge and, where transferred, heard by an Additional Sessions Judge.[1]

The steps below summarise how a well-run criminal revision Bangladesh courts entertain proceeds from order to disposal.

Swipe or scroll →

Stay of proceedings pending revision

The interim order often matters more than the final one. When the High Court Division issues a Rule, it may stay further proceedings in the trial court or stay the operation of the impugned order, typically for a limited period. In Md Nazmul Islam, all further proceedings in the complaint case were stayed for six months pending the Rule; in Akhteruzzaman, the bail order was stayed for six months.[7] [6] A discharged Rule vacates the stay.[4]

Time-limited stays lapse unless extended, and a trial court is entitled to proceed once a stay has expired. Keep the extension calendar alongside the hearing calendar. The principles on which courts grant, extend and vacate interim stays across civil and criminal matters are covered in our guide to stay orders in Bangladesh.

Old Rules and backlog drives

In 2026 the Supreme Court began a backlog drive under the Chief Justice's direction. On 25 June 2026 alone the High Court Division disposed of 3,009 old criminal miscellaneous cases, and by early August fourteen criminal motion benches had cleared 50,325 long-pending criminal miscellaneous cases in the first phase.[11] [12] Parties to old Rules should keep instructions current, because a long-pending matter can be listed and disposed of quickly.

Civil vs criminal revision in Bangladesh

The two jurisdictions share a name but differ in source, structure and reach. Civil revision is governed by section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The High Court Division may revise a decree or order of a District Judge or Additional District Judge, or a non-appealable decree of a lower civil court, for an error of law resulting in an error in the decision occasioning failure of justice; the District Judge may revise non-appealable orders of the lower civil courts; and a further revision to the High Court Division from the District Judge lies only with leave, on an error of an important question of law.[8]

Criminal revision is wider in grounds and narrower in tiers. The test is correctness, legality or propriety, not an error of law alone; the court can act of its own motion; and a second revision is barred outright, whereas civil law allows one by leave.[1] The civil scheme, including its limitation practice and its interaction with the Commercial Courts Act 2026, is explained in our guide to civil revision in Bangladesh.

Revision, appeal or quashment: choosing the remedy

The three remedies overlap, and choosing the wrong one can cost the case. Three questions resolve most choices.

Does an appeal lie?

If the Code or a special statute gives an appeal against a conviction or sentence, file the appeal. Section 439(5) bars revision by the party who could have appealed and did not.[1] This is the most common trap in cheque dishonour cases, where convictions are appealable and the appeal carries its own conditions; our guide to the cheque case appeal in Bangladesh covers that route. Interlocutory orders in the same cases, such as refusals to recall a witness, remain revisable.

Is the complaint about an order, or about the proceeding itself?

Revision corrects a particular finding, sentence or order. Where the complaint is that the whole proceeding is an abuse of process, for example because the allegations disclose no offence even if accepted, section 561A is designed for that purpose.[1] The two can be combined in one petition where the grounds overlap, but each must be argued on its own test.

Has a revision already been decided?

If the Sessions Judge has decided a revision under section 439A, the High Court Division cannot entertain a second one, and only section 561A remains.[1] [5] From a High Court Division revisional judgment, the further route is a criminal petition for leave to appeal to the Appellate Division under article 103(3) of the Constitution, except in the cases where article 103(2) gives an appeal as of right.[9]

For the wider structure of criminal proceedings and the remedies available at each stage, see our overview of criminal law in Bangladesh.

Criminal revision Bangladesh after the 2026 amendment

The interim government amended the Code by two ordinances in 2025. After the February 2026 election, Law Minister Md Asaduzzaman placed the amending bill and Parliament passed it by voice vote on 7 April 2026.[3] The Code of Criminal Procedure (Amendment) Act 2026, Act No XI of 2026 dated 10 April 2026, repealed the Code of Criminal Procedure (Amendment) Ordinance 2025 (Ordinance No 36 of 2025) and the Second Amendment Ordinance 2025 (Ordinance No 41 of 2025), saving action taken under them. Section 12 is deemed effective from 10 July 2025 and the remaining provisions from 10 August 2025.[2]

What did not change

The Act amends sections 32, 51, 54, 69, 70, 167, 247, 250, 260, 339B, 345, 396, 413, 414, 498, 499, 540A and 544, inserts new sections including 46A to 46E, 54A, 67A, 167A, 173A, 173B and 264A, and omits sections 390 to 395. It does not amend sections 435 to 442A or section 561A.[2] The revisional structure, the second-revision bar and the ninety-day disposal provision are exactly as before.

Changes that matter in revision

• More non-appealable fines. Sections 22 and 23 of the Act raised the thresholds in sections 413 and 414 from fifty taka and two hundred taka to five thousand taka.[2] Where no appeal lies, revision is the only remedy, so more petty convictions now go to revision.
• Discharge on an interim report. New section 173A allows a supervising police officer to require an interim investigation report and, if it discloses insufficient evidence against an accused, the Magistrate or Tribunal may discharge that accused while investigation continues against others; the accused may still be named later on sufficient and substantive evidence.[2] A section 173A discharge is a Magistrate's order and, in our view, falls within section 435.
• Investigation deadlines. New section 173B requires investigation within sixty working days, extendable by the Magistrate, who may transfer the investigation to another officer if the extended time is missed.[2]
• Compensation for false accusation. Section 250 now says the Magistrate "shall", rather than "may", order compensation where an accusation is false and frivolous or vexatious, with higher limits, including fifty thousand taka under sub-section (2).[2]
• Bail conditions and compounding. New section 498(2) lets a court impose reasonable conditions on bail, and new section 345(8) lets a court facilitate compounding, including by referral to a legal aid officer, and preserve the agreement on the record.[2] Both create orders that can be challenged as improper.

The courts and offices involved

The cards below summarise who does what in a criminal revision Bangladesh courts hear in 2026.

Common mistakes in criminal revision

• Filing in the Sessions court without thinking about the second step. A lost section 439A revision cannot be followed by a second revision in the High Court Division.[1]
• Using revision instead of appeal. Section 439(5) bars it for the party who could have appealed.[1]
• Asking the court to try the facts. A revision against framing of charge that argues the defence case will fail; one that shows the materials disclose no offence may succeed.[4]
• Treating the sixty days as optional. The court can entertain a late revision, but the burden of explaining delay grows with every week.[4]
• Seeking conviction in revision. Section 439(4) does not allow the High Court Division to convert an acquittal into a conviction.[1]
• Letting the stay lapse. A time-limited stay must be extended before it expires, or the trial court may proceed.[7]
• Ignoring notice requirements. An order to the prejudice of an accused, or a further-inquiry direction against a discharged accused, made without hearing him is vulnerable.[1]

Practical strategy for 2026

A criminal revision Bangladesh courts will take seriously is narrow, documented and early. Identify the single error that caused the injustice, show it from the record, and connect it to prejudice. File within sixty days with a certified copy of the order. Choose the forum deliberately: the Sessions Judge for speed on a routine Magistrate's order, the High Court Division where the point is one of law, where the record shows a serious irregularity, or where losing at the Sessions tier would leave only section 561A.

The 2026 amendment has created new decisions, under sections 173A, 173B, 250 and 498(2), that will test the revisional courts in the coming year, and more petty convictions now fall outside any appeal. TRW acts for accused persons, complainants and corporate victims in criminal revisions before the Sessions courts and the High Court Division, and in section 561A applications. Our criminal quashment and revision practice can review an order within the sixty-day window, or you can contact TRW directly.

Frequently asked questions

What is a criminal revision in Bangladesh?

It is an application asking the High Court Division or a Sessions Judge to examine the record of an inferior criminal court and correct an incorrect, illegal or improper finding, sentence or order, under sections 435, 439 and 439A of the Code of Criminal Procedure.[1]

Which court hears a criminal revision?

Both the High Court Division and the Sessions Judge have revisional power over inferior criminal courts within their local limits. An Additional Sessions Judge may hear revisions transferred to him by the Sessions Judge.[1]

Can I file a second revision in the High Court Division after losing before the Sessions Judge?

No. Section 439A(2) makes the Sessions Judge's decision final for the applicant, and section 439(4) bars the High Court Division from entertaining a revision against it. Only the inherent jurisdiction under section 561A remains, on a high threshold.[1] [5]

What is the time limit for a criminal revision?

No statute fixes one. The High Court Division follows a long-standing sixty-day practice drawn from Article 155 of the Limitation Act, but may entertain a later revision where the delay is explained and not grossly negligent.[4]

Can an order framing charge be challenged in revision?

Yes. Revision is the usual remedy, but the court asks only whether the prosecution materials disclose a prima facie case. Disputed facts are left to the trial.[4]

Can a complainant challenge a discharge of the accused?

Yes. A complainant or the State may seek revision of a discharge, and the revisional court may direct further inquiry under section 436, but only after giving the discharged person an opportunity to show cause.[1]

Can the High Court Division convict an acquitted accused in revision?

No. Section 439(4) prevents it from converting an acquittal into a conviction. It may set the acquittal aside and order a retrial or further inquiry.[1]

Can I file a revision instead of an appeal?

Not if an appeal lies. Section 439(5) bars revision at the instance of a party who could have appealed and did not.[1]

Did the 2026 amendment change criminal revision?

Act No XI of 2026 did not amend sections 435 to 442A or 561A. It raised the non-appealable fine thresholds in sections 413 and 414 to five thousand taka and created new revisable orders, such as discharges on an interim investigation report under section 173A.[2]

How is criminal revision different from civil revision?

Civil revision under section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure turns on an error of law occasioning failure of justice and allows a further revision with leave. Criminal revision tests correctness, legality and propriety, can be exercised of the court's own motion, and bars a second revision outright.[8] [1]