Constitutional pardon and remission powers remain unaffected by statutory remission limits; conviction and sentence were upheld.

Statutory restrictions on remission under Section 433A of the Code of Criminal Procedure do not curtail the constitutional powers of pardon and remission under Articles 72 and 161, and the same principle was noted in relation to Article 226. The Court also found no infirmity in the High Court's judgment upholding the conviction and sentence, so no interference was warranted. The conviction and sentence therefore remained undisturbed, while any further relief was left to the available executive or constitutional remission process.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether there was any ground to interfere with the High Court's judgment upholding the conviction and sentence. (ii) Whether the constitutional powers of pardon and remission under Articles 72 and 161 are curtailed by Section 433A of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

Issue (i): Whether there was any ground to interfere with the High Court's judgment upholding the conviction and sentence.

Analysis: The High Court had dealt with the matter in detail and the impugned judgment disclosed no infirmity. The appellate court found no reason to disagree with the conclusion reached by the High Court.

Conclusion: No interference was warranted, and the conviction and sentence were upheld.

Issue (ii): Whether the constitutional powers of pardon and remission under Articles 72 and 161 are curtailed by Section 433A of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

Analysis: Remission is a matter for the executive authorities. Section 433A can restrict statutory powers of remission under Sections 432 and 433 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, but it cannot limit the constitutional powers of the President under Article 72 or the Governor under Article 161. Constitutional power prevails over subordinate legislation, and the same principle applies to the High Court's constitutional power under Article 226.

Conclusion: The powers under Articles 72 and 161 are not restricted by Section 433A, though relief may still be sought from the appropriate Government under the statutory scheme.

Final Conclusion: The appeal failed, the conviction and sentence remained undisturbed, and the appellant was left to pursue any available executive or constitutional remedy for remission or pardon.

Ratio Decidendi: Statutory restrictions on remission cannot curtail constitutional powers of pardon and remission, and interference with a conviction will not follow where no infirmity is found in the lower court's judgment.

---