Case Note & Summary
This matter involves a state appeal under Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 and a revision application under Section 397 CrPC filed by the original complainant, both challenging the judgment of acquittal dated 02.07.1997 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Ahmedabad (Rural) in Sessions Case No. 30 of 1993. The accused were charged under Sections 302, 326, 147, 148, 149, 453 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 135 of the Bombay Police Act, 1951. The incident dated 02.07.1992 involved a fight between the complainant’s son and accused no.1 over false swearing, stemming from old enmity between the Marwadi and Thakore communities. Later that night, the deceased and another were returning from a cricket match when they were attacked by the accused near Ramdev Pir temple. The complainant alleged that accused no.1 wielded a sword while the others had scythes, causing injuries to his two sons and another person; his son Madarji Nathaji succumbed to injuries during treatment. During trial, the prosecution examined twelve witnesses and relied on documentary evidence including post‑mortem report, injury certificates, and FSL reports. The trial court acquitted all six accused. The state preferred an appeal and the complainant filed a revision. During pendency, three accused died and the proceedings abated against them. The High Court, before delivering the judgment, discussed the legal parameters of revisional jurisdiction under Section 401 CrPC. Relying on Supreme Court decisions in Sheetala Prasad v. Sri Kant (2010) 2 SCC 190 and Joseph Stephen v. Santhanasamy (2022) 13 SCC 115, the court noted that the revisional power cannot be used to convert an acquittal into conviction due to the bar in Section 401(3) and that a private complainant’s revision is maintainable only in specific categories. The remaining part of the judgment containing the final decision on the merits of the appeal and revision is not included in the extracted text.
Headnote
A) Criminal Procedure – Revisional Jurisdiction – Scope and Limitations – Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, Sections 401(3), 401(4), 401(5) – The High Court in its revisional jurisdiction under Section 401 CrPC can exercise any powers conferred on a Court of Appeal under Sections 386, 389, 390, 391 or on a Court of Session under Section 307, but cannot convert a finding of acquittal into conviction due to the express bar in sub-section (3). Further, if an appeal lies and no appeal is brought, a revision by the party who could have appealed is barred under sub-section (4), but the High Court may treat a revision as an appeal if it was filed under erroneous belief that no appeal lies, in the interests of justice under sub-section (5). (Paras 5-5.4) B) Criminal Procedure – Revision by Private Complainant – Grounds for Interference – Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, Sections 397, 401 – The Supreme Court in Sheetala Prasad v. Sri Kant held that a revision by a private complainant against acquittal is maintainable only in specific categories: (1) where the trial court wrongly shut out prosecution evidence, (2) where admissible evidence was brushed aside as inadmissible, (3) where trial court lacked jurisdiction, (4) where material evidence was overlooked or order passed considering irrelevant evidence, and (5) where acquittal based on invalid compounding of offence. This court referred to this principle while considering the revision filed by the original complainant. (Paras 5.1-5.2) C) Criminal Procedure – Appeal – Abatement – Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – During pendency of the state appeal against acquittal, three accused died, leading to abatement of the appeal against them by orders dated 25.08.2022 and 20.10.2022, leaving the appeal to proceed against the surviving accused nos. 1, 3, and 5. (Para 4)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the High Court can interfere with the acquittal in the appeal under Section 378 CrPC and in the revision under Section 397 CrPC, and the scope of revisional power under Section 401 CrPC, particularly the bar on converting acquittal to conviction.
Law Points
- scope of revisional jurisdiction under Section 401 CrPC
- bar on conversion of acquittal to conviction under Section 401(3)
- categories for revision by private complainant
- abatement of appeal on death of accused
