https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=301089 After disposal of an appeal, the lower appellate court has no residual power under Sections 386 or 389(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure to suspend sentence or grant bail merely to facilitate a revision, because it becomes functus officio. Concurrent findings sustaining a conviction under Section 354 of the Indian Penal Code are not to be disturbed in revision unless they are perverse, unsupported by evidence, or vitiated by legal error; here, the conviction was maintained. On the facts, probation was considered appropriate because the accused was about 17 years old, had no prior conviction, and was not shown to be a habitual offender, so reformative treatment was granted. en-us Thu, 24 Aug 1995 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 11 Mar 2022 17:08:19 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=301089 After disposal of an appeal, the lower appellate court has no residual power under Sections 386 or 389(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure to suspend sentence or grant bail merely to facilitate a revision, because it becomes functus officio. Concurrent findings sustaining a conviction under Section 354 of the Indian Penal Code are not to be disturbed in revision unless they are perverse, unsupported by evidence, or vitiated by legal error; here, the conviction was maintained. On the facts, probation was considered appropriate because the accused was about 17 years old, had no prior conviction, and was not shown to be a habitual offender, so reformative treatment was granted. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 24 Aug 1995 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=301089