2021 (7) TMI 837

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....firming the judgment of conviction, the revision petition lies under Section 397 read with Section 401 Cr.P.C. 4. The Hon'ble Supreme Court has, in case of Vivek Rai & Anr. vs. High Court of Jharkhand through Registrar General & Ors.- JT 2015 (2) SC 32, held as under: "5..................... It is well known practice that generally a revision against conviction and sentence is filed after an appeal is dismissed and the convicted person is taken into custody in Court itself..........." 5. A three-Judges Bench of the Hon'ble Apex Court of India has, in case of Girish Kumar Suneja vs. Central Bureau of Investigation- (2017) 14 SCC 809, held as under: "16. There are three categories of orders that a court can pass-final, intermediate and interlocutory. There is no doubt that in respect of a final order, a court can exercise its revision jurisdiction-that is in respect of a final order of acquittal or conviction. There is equally no doubt that in respect of an interlocutory order, the court cannot exercise its revision jurisdiction. As far as an intermediate order is concerned, the court can exercise its revision jurisdiction since it is not an interlocutory order." 6. Si....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....der passed in any appeal, inquiry, trial or other proceeding. (3) If an application under this section has been made by any person either to the High Court or to the Sessions Judge, no further application by the same person shall be entertained by the other of them." 8. Section 401 of Cr.P.C. reads as under: "401. High Court's powers of revision- (1) xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (2) xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (3) Nothing in this section shall be deemed to authorise a High Court to convert a finding of acquittal into one of conviction. (4) xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (5) xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx." 9. This Court, from the conspectus of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court of India in the cases of Vivek Rai & Anr. (supra), Girish Kumar Suneja (supra) and Damodar S. Prabhu (supra) and the provisions contained in Section 397 and Section 401 of Cr.P.C., is satisfied that revision lies against the order of conviction affirmed in appeal. 10. Confronted with this situation, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. can be filed....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....rt to inherent power is not right except under compelling circumstances. Not that there is absence of jurisdiction but that inherent power should not invade areas set apart for specific power under the same Code." 14. Hamida vs. Rashid @ Rasheed & Ors.- (2008) 1 SCC 474: "6. We are in agreement with the contention advanced on behalf of the complainant appellant. Section 482 Cr.P.C. saves the inherent powers of the High Court and its language is quite explicit when it says that nothing in the Code shall be deemed to limit or affect the inherent powers of the High Court to make such orders as may be necessary to give effect to any order under the Code, or to prevent abuse of the process of any Court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice. A procedural Code, however exhaustive, cannot expressly provide for all time to come against all the cases or points that may possibly arise, and in order that justice may not suffer, it is necessary that every court must in proper cases exercise its inherent power for the ends of justice or for the purpose of carrying out the other provisions of the Code. It is well-established principle that every Court has inherent power to act ex debito j....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....rted to if there is a specific provision in the Code or any other enactment for redress of the grievance of the aggrieved party. This power should not be exercised against an express bar of law engrafted in any other provision of the Criminal Procedure Code. This power cannot be exercised as against an express bar in some other enactment." 9. In Arun Shankar Shukla v. State of U.P. (1999) 6 SCC 146 the High Court had entertained a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. after an order of conviction had been passed by the Sessions Judge and before the sentence had been awarded and further proceedings in the case had been stayed. In appeal this Court set aside the order of the High Court after reiterating the principle that it is well settled that inherent power is not to be invoked in respect of any matter covered by specific provisions of the Code or if its exercise would infringe any specific provision of the Code. It was further observed that the High Court overlooked the procedural law which empowered the convicted accused to prefer statutory appeal against conviction of the offence and intervened at an uncalled for stage and soft-pedalled the course of justice at a very crucial st....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....y of compromise, can be taken by this Court in its revisional jurisdictional also and appropriate order can be passed. 19. The judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of K.M. Ibrahim (supra), affirms the aforesaid view. In that case also, the appellant before the Hon'ble Supreme Court filed a revision petition against the judgment of conviction under Section 138 of the Act of 1881 affirmed in appeal and the matter went to the Hon'ble Supreme Court from the order dismissing the revision petition and in that case also, the judgment of conviction was set aside as the parties have settled their dispute amicably. 20. The Hon'ble Apex Court has, in the case of Damodar S. Prabhu (supra), held as under: "21. With regard to the progression of litigation in cheque bouncing cases, the learned Attorney General has urged this Court to frame guidelines for a graded scheme of imposing costs on parties who unduly delay compounding of the offence. It was submitted that the requirement of deposit of the costs will act as a deterrent for delayed composition, since at present, free and easy compounding of offences at any stage, however belated, gives an incentive to the draw....