1. The order/judgement passed by the dingle bench in Criminal jurisdiction of the Calcutta High Court can not be challenged before the Division Bench of the high court.

2.However if the order passed is shared then further course of action can be advised.

3. For appeal though only the supreme court is the option.

In the case of State of Maharashtra v. Jagmohan Singh Kuldip Singh Anand and Ors

. The Supreme Court observed that the Revisional Court is empowered to exercise all the powers conferred on the Appellate Court by virtue of the provisions contained in Section 410 CrPC. Section 401 CrPC is provision enabling the High Court to exercise all powers of Appellate Court, if necessary, in aid of power of superintendence or supervision as a part of power of revision conferred on the High Court or the Session Court. Section 397 CrPC confers power on the High Court or Sessions Court, as the case may be, "for the purpose of satisfying itself or himself as to the correctness, legality or propriety of any finding, sentence or order, recorded or passed and as to regularity of any proceeding of such inferior court." It is for the above purpose, if necessary, the High Court or Sessions Court can exercise all appellate powers. Section 401 CrPC conferring powers of Appellate Court on the Revisional Court is with the above limited purpose. The provisions contained in Section 395 to Section 401 CrPC, read together, do not indicate that the revisional power of the High Court can be exercised as a second appellate power.

No it cannot be. The only remedy is SLP to the Supreme Court.

You will have to consult a local lawyer who can see the HC rules of the High Court of your jurisdiction, as per my knowledge order of the court passed in criminal revision can be challenged in the HC by means of SLP.

regards

Supreme court in A.R. Antulay vs R.S. Nayak & Anr on 29 April, 1988

has stated which is in line to your query:

The circumstance that a decision is reached per- incuriam, merely serves to denude the decision of its precedent-value. Such a decision would not be binding as a judicial precedent. A co-ordinate bench can discharge with it and decline to follow it. A larger bench can over-rule such decision. When a previous decision is so overruled it does not happen nor has the overruling bench any jurisdiction so to do that the finality of the operative order, inter-parties, in the previous decision is over- turned. In this context the word 'decision' means only the reason for the previous order and not the operative-order in the previous decision, binding inter-parties. Even if a previous decision is over.

Overruling when made by a larger Bench of an earlier decision of a smaller one is intended to take away the precedent value of the decision without affecting the binding effect of the decision in the particular case. [89C] In the instant case, the appellant is, therefore, not entitled to take advantage of the matter being before a larger Bench. In fact, if it is a case of exercise of inherent powers to rectify a mistake it was open even to a five-Judge Bench to do that and it did not require a Bench larger than the Constitution Bench for that purpose. [89D] Per Oza, J. (Supplementing)

In another appeal before supreme court in MP stae Vs. Anshuman Shukla in appeal No. 1145/2009, it was stated thus:

High Court’s power of revision –(1)-

The High Court may suo motu at any time

or on an application made to it within

three months of the award by an aggrieved

party, call for the record of any case in

which an award has been made under this

Act by issuing a requisition to the

Tribunal, and upon receipt of such

requisition the Tribunal shall send or

cause to be sent to that Court the

concerned award and record thereof.

(2) If it appears to the High Court

that the Tribunal –

(a) has exercised a jurisdiction

not vested in it by law; or

(b) has failed to exercise a

jurisdiction so vested; or

(c) has acted in exercise of its

jurisdiction illegally, or

with material irregularity;

or

(d) has misconducted itself or

the proceedings; or

(e) has made an award which is

invalid or has been

improperly procured by any

party to the proceedings,

the High Court may make such order in the

case as it thinks fit.

(3) The High Court shall in deciding

any revision under this section

Page 8

8

exercise the same powers and

follow the same procedure as far

as may be, as it does in deciding

a revision under Section 115 of

the Code of Civil Procedure,

1908(No.5 of 1908).

(4) The High Court shall cause a copy

of its order in revision to be

certified to the Tribunal.

Explanation.-For the purposes of this

section, an award shall include an

“interim” award.”

There are plenty of judgments with regard to revisions, you may browse through the internet for more judgments

thanks for your appreciation

you can challenge order of learned single judge before division bench

The Supreme Court observed that the Revisional Court is empowered to exercise all the powers conferred on the Appellate Court

that is not how a case is referred to a larger bench, your cr. revision has been decided on merits and therefore going to the SC is the only option, any revision that is dismissed can not be referred to a larger bench on request of the accused.

Regards

The following matters may be heard and disposed of by a Single Judge:

an appeal, application or reference under the Code of Criminal Procedure,

1973 other than-

(a) an appeal in a case in which a sentence of death or of imprisonment for

life has been passed;

(b) an appeal under section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure from an

order of acquittal passed in respect of an offence punishable with death

or imprisonment for life except an offence under section 409 of the

Indian Penal Code;

(c) a case submitted under section 366 of the Code of Criminal Procedure;

and

(d) a case in which a notice has been issued under section 377 or section

401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to show cause why the sentence

should not be enhanced relating to an offence punishable with death or

imprisonment for life:

(xii) [2]

Transfer Applications.

(xiii) Criminal Appeals, Government Appeals, Misc. Appeals and Jail Criminal

Appeals.

(xiv) Criminal Revisions.

(xv) Applications for Bail or Anticipatory Bail matters;

All cases of routine nature not involving any question of law or merits of

the case, shall be placed before a Single Judge for orders irrespective of the

fact as to whether the cases are Single Judge or Division Bench cases, and he

may while disposing of the matter exercise the powers of dismissal in case of

non-compliance.

Provided that all the interlocutory petitions registered as Miscellaneous

cases which demand going into question of law or merit would be placed

before the Division Bench, if the cases in which those matters arises are

required to be heard and disposed of by a Division Bench.

Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in the rules, the Chief Justice may direct that

any application, petition, suit, appeal or reference shall be heard by the Full Bench, by

which is meant a Bench composed of not less than three Judges.

However, to opine safely, in general the high court go into the precedent value of the decision without affecting the binding effect of the decision in the particular case already made by the single judge, hence a SLP or appeal before supreme court may be a step that can be initiated in furtherance.