Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether a criminal revision against conviction is maintainable when the convicted person is neither in custody nor has surrendered after conviction, in view of Chapter 10, Rule 48 of the High Court of Madhya Pradesh Rules, 2008.
Analysis: Section 397 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 does not by itself require surrender before filing a revision, but the High Court Rules impose an additional procedural requirement. Rule 48 mandates that a memorandum of revision against conviction, except where sentence has been suspended by the Court below, must contain a declaration that the convicted person is in custody or has surrendered after conviction. The language of the rule was treated as clear and unambiguous, and the use of the word "shall" was read as making the declaration mandatory. The earlier view that no surrender was required was distinguished because the specific rule was not considered there.
Conclusion: A revision petition against conviction is maintainable only if it contains the declaration required by Rule 48 that the convicted person is in custody or has surrendered after conviction, except where the sentence has been suspended by the Court below.
Ratio Decidendi: Where a court rule governing criminal revisions uses mandatory language requiring a declaration of custody or surrender after conviction, that procedural requirement must be complied with for maintainability, unless the rule itself creates a specific exception.