Conflicting appellate and revisional orders were set aside, and connected proceedings were remanded for fresh adjudication.

Conflicting appellate and revisional orders arising from the same complaint were held unsustainable because the appellate court maintained the conviction while the revisional court, in the complainant's revision, set aside the conviction and remitted the matter for sentence. The High Court noted the revisional court had overlooked the limited scope of revisional jurisdiction and proceeded on an incorrect understanding of compensation, since the trial court had not awarded it in the manner assumed. To remove the inconsistent disposal and restore orderly adjudication, both orders were set aside and the two proceedings were remanded for fresh decision in accordance with law.

---

---

Issues: Whether the conflicting appellate and revisional orders passed by the same court in connected proceedings arising from the same complaint were liable to be set aside and the matters remanded for fresh decision in accordance with law.

Analysis: The appellate court had dismissed the accused's appeal and maintained the conviction, while the revisional court, in the complainant's revision, purported to set aside the conviction order and remit the matter for passing appropriate sentence. The reasoning disclosed a failure to appreciate the effect of maintaining the conviction, the limited scope of revisional jurisdiction, and the legal consequences of reopening the matter after disposal of the appeal. The revisional court also proceeded on an incorrect understanding of compensation, as the trial court had not awarded compensation in the manner assumed. In view of these conflicting and unsustainable approaches, the proper course was to set aside both orders and direct a fresh decision on both proceedings.

Conclusion: The orders of the appellate and revisional court were set aside and both proceedings were remanded for decision afresh in accordance with law.

Final Conclusion: The High Court interfered only to correct the mutually inconsistent disposal of the connected matters and restored them for fresh adjudication.

---