Inherent criminal jurisdiction cannot override statutory limits on revision; limitation relief on appeal against acquittal remains subject to Section 470.

Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure cannot be used to override an express statutory scheme or validate a revisional court's conversion of an acquittal into a conviction, because Section 401(3) bars such conversion in revision and Section 378 provides the proper remedy by appeal against acquittal. The complainant was therefore left to pursue the appellate remedy rather than rely on inherent jurisdiction. On limitation, Section 470 permits exclusion of time only where its statutory conditions are met, and the appellate court was directed to consider any plea for exclusion when the appeal is filed within the permitted time.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 could be invoked to overturn the revisional court's conversion of an acquittal into a conviction. (ii) Whether the complainant, if filing an appeal against acquittal, could seek exclusion of time under Section 470 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

Issue (i): Whether inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 could be invoked to overturn the revisional court's conversion of an acquittal into a conviction.

Analysis: The power under Section 482 is intended to prevent abuse of process or secure the ends of justice, but it cannot be used to bypass an express statutory scheme. Since Section 401(3) bars conversion of an acquittal into conviction in revision, and Section 378 provides the specific remedy of appeal against acquittal, inherent jurisdiction could not be employed to sustain or validate the revisional court's conversion of acquittal into conviction.

Conclusion: The challenge to the revisional order could not be upheld on the footing of inherent jurisdiction; the statutory limitation on revisional power controlled the matter.

Issue (ii): Whether the complainant, if filing an appeal against acquittal, could seek exclusion of time under Section 470 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

Analysis: Section 470 permits exclusion of time spent in bona fide prosecution with due diligence where the earlier proceeding was unable to be entertained for defect of jurisdiction or a like cause. The Court indicated that, if an appeal against acquittal was filed within the time granted, the appellate court should consider the request for exclusion of time in light of that provision.

Conclusion: Liberty was granted to the complainant to move the appropriate appellate court, which was directed to consider limitation in accordance with Section 470.

Final Conclusion: The revision was not used to disturb the statutory appellate framework, and the complainant was left at liberty to pursue the remedy of appeal against acquittal with a plea on limitation.

Ratio Decidendi: Inherent powers under Section 482 cannot be used to override an express statutory bar or the specific appellate remedy provided by the Code, and exclusion of time under Section 470 is available only where the statutory conditions are satisfied.

---