Scope of High Court's Revisional Jurisdiction in Criminal Cases

The Supreme Court recently addressed the scope of a High Court's revisional jurisdiction under Section 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) in a case where the High Court had overturned an acquittal and ordered conviction.

 Prohibition on Conversion of Acquittal to Conviction

The Court observed that under Section 401(3) CrPC (corresponding to Section 442(3) of the BNSS), the High Court does not have the authority to convert a finding of acquittal into one of conviction while exercising its revisional jurisdiction. If the High Court believes the acquittal was wrong, it should remand the matter back to the appellate court for re-appreciation instead of reversing the acquittal itself.

Improper Approach by High Court

In the present case, the High Court had reversed the appellate court's acquittal order and ordered conviction of the appellant in a cheque dishonor matter under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The Supreme Court found this approach improper and unsustainable.

Remand to Appellate Court for Re-appreciation

Accordingly, the Supreme Court deemed it appropriate to remit the matter back to the appellate court (Additional District and Sessions Judge) for re-appreciation after considering the contentions of both parties. The Court ordered the parties to appear before the appellate court within four weeks for an appropriate decision to be rendered.

Conclusion

In summary, the Supreme Court reiterated that the High Court's revisional jurisdiction under Section 401 CrPC does not empower it to convert an acquittal to conviction. If the High Court finds the acquittal erroneous, it must remand the case to the appellate court for a fresh look at the evidence and arguments. This judgment underscores the limited nature of the High Court's revisional powers and the need to safeguard the rights of the accused when exercising such discretionary jurisdiction.