Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.
Provisions expressly mentioned in the judgment/order text.
Maintainability of appeals u/s 377 of CrPC against inadequate sentence was examined. Offences u/s 279-A of IT Act, 1961 are non-cognizable, triable by Magistrate. Special Court for economic offences, presided over by Magistrate, does not qualify as 'any other Court' under clause (b). Appeals against conviction for IT Act offences lie before Sessions Judge u/s 374 CrPC. If High Court allows appeal against inadequate sentence while Sessions Court acquits on appeal against conviction, it may lead to conflicting judgments. To avoid this, appeals against conviction and inadequate sentence must be dealt with simultaneously by the same court as held in Ammannamma case. u/s 377(3) CrPC, accused can plead for acquittal or sentence reduction in appeal against inadequate sentence, without waiting for State's appeal. Accused has statutory right u/s 374(3) CrPC to challenge conviction and sentence. Income Tax Department's appeals u/s 377 CrPC against inadequate sentence are not maintainable and dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
