Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Ambadas Kalidas Panchal, was the original first informant in a criminal case. He lodged a complaint before the Magistrate, who ordered investigation under Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC). A chargesheet was filed against respondent nos.1 and 2 alleging offences under Sections 324, 323, 504, 506(II), and 389 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC). The Magistrate, after trial, acquitted the respondents on 10th August 2009. Aggrieved, the petitioner filed a revision application before the Sessions Court. The Additional Sessions Judge upheld the acquittal for most offences but convicted the respondents under Section 323 IPC read with Section 34 IPC, sentencing each to a fine of Rs.500 with default simple imprisonment of five days. The petitioner, still dissatisfied, filed the present petition under Article 227 of the Constitution seeking quashing of the revisional order and either remand for reframing of charges or conviction for the other offences. The High Court examined the legality of the revisional order. It noted that the respondents were acquitted after trial, and the acquittal was challenged only by revision, not appeal. The court held that under Section 401(3) CrPC, a revisional court cannot convert a finding of acquittal into one of conviction. Therefore, the conviction under Section 323 IPC read with Section 34 IPC was patently illegal. The High Court set aside that part of the revisional order, restoring the acquittal for that offence, while leaving the rest of the order undisturbed. The petition was partly allowed.
Headnote
A) Criminal Procedure - Revisional Jurisdiction - Conversion of Acquittal into Conviction - Section 401(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - The revisional court, while hearing a revision against an acquittal, cannot convert the finding of acquittal into one of conviction. The order of the Additional Sessions Judge convicting the respondents under Section 323 IPC read with Section 34 IPC was held to be patently illegal as it contravened the express bar under Section 401(3) CrPC. The High Court set aside the conviction while maintaining the acquittal on other charges. (Paras 4-5)
Issue of Consideration
Whether a revisional court can convert an order of acquittal into one of conviction under the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973
Final Decision
The High Court partly allowed the petition. It set aside the conviction of respondent nos.1 and 2 under Section 323 IPC read with Section 34 IPC as recorded by the Additional Sessions Judge, restoring the acquittal for that offence. The rest of the revisional order was left undisturbed.
Law Points
- Revisional jurisdiction cannot convert acquittal into conviction
- Section 401(3) CrPC bars conversion of acquittal into conviction in revision
- High Court's power under Article 227 is supervisory and cannot be used to circumvent CrPC limitations
