& Ors. (1973 (3) SCC 690) wherein the Apex Court speaking through three learned Judges has held that the power under Section 439 of the Code (now Section 397) is one which the High Court can exercise suo motu and all that a person filing a revision petition under that Section does is to draw the court's attention to an illegal, improper or incorrect finding, sentence or order of a subordinate Court. The Apex court has further held that the power of revision in criminal cases vesting in the High Court, though wide and also exercisable suo motu is a power which, generally speaking, is narrower and more limited than its appellate power, though in certain respects it has a somewhat wider scope. It is discretionary and cannot be invoked as of right such as is the case of appellate power. Broadly stated, the object of conferring revisional power is to clothe the highest court in a State with a jurisdiction of general supervision and superintendence in order to correct grave failure or miscarriage of justice arising from erroneous or defective orders. The error or defect may arise from misconception of law, irregularity of procedure, misreading of evidence, misapprehension or misconception about law or facts, mere perversity or even undue hardship or leniency. The real core of this power is that its exercise is justified only to set right grave failure of justice and not merely to rectify every error however inconsequential. In para 12 of the
