Step 1: Understanding the Concept:
The question asks which authority has the power to determine the language of the subordinate criminal courts (courts other than the High Court) within a state.
Step 2: Detailed Explanation:
Section 272 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, is titled "Language of Courts." It states:
"The State Government may determine what shall be, for purposes of this Code, the language of every Court within the State other than the High Court."
This provision gives the exclusive power to the State Government to decide the official language to be used in all criminal proceedings in the subordinate courts (like the courts of Magistrates and Sessions Judges) within its territory. The language of the High Court is determined by separate constitutional provisions (Article 348).
The Central Government or the Supreme Court does not have a role in determining the language of subordinate courts in a state.
Step 3: Final Answer:
The State Government determines the language of all criminal courts within the state, other than the High Court.
Having heard the learned Counsels for the parties, and on perusal of the ma terial on record, the primary issue which arises for consideration of this Court is ”whether a review or recall of an order passed in a criminal proceeding initiated under section 340 of CrPC is permissible or not?” [...] A careful consideration of the statutory provisions and the aforesaid decisions of this Court clarify the now-well settled position of jurisprudence of Section 362 of CrPC which when summarized would be that the criminal courts, as envisaged under the CrPC, are barred from altering or reviewing in their own judgments except for the exceptions which are explicitly provided by the statute, namely, correction of a clerical or an arithmetical error that might have been committed or the said power is provided under any other law for the time being in force. As the courts become functus officio the very moment a judgment or an order is signed, the bar of Section 362 CrPC becomes applicable. Despite the powers provided under Section 482 CrPC which, this veil cannot allow the courts to step beyond or circumvent an explicit bar. It also stands clarified that it is only in situations wherein an application for recall of an order or judgment seeking a procedural review that the bar would not apply and not a substantive review where the bar as contained in Section 362 CrPC is attracted. Numerous decisions of this Court have also elaborated that the bar under said provision is to be applied stricto sensu.
(Extracted with edits and revisions from Vikram Bakshi v. RP Khosla 2025 INSC 1020)