1957 (5) TMI 48 - HC - Indian Laws

Summary

Issues:
1. Revision of appellate judgment maintaining conviction under Section 323, I.P.C.
2. Validity of the summary dismissal of the revision petition.
3. Power of the High Court to review its previous order.
4. Compounding of the offense and its effect on the conviction and sentence.

Analysis:
1. The petitioners sought revision of the appellate judgment upholding their conviction under Section 323, I.P.C., and the substantive sentence of imprisonment. The incident involved the assault of a Travelling Ticket Examiner due to a previous grudge. The trial court and the appellate court both agreed on the adequacy of the sentence for all three petitioners, with Namdeo Sindhi being considered the principal offender.

2. The summary dismissal of the revision petition for Namdeo Sindhi and Puranmal Sindhi was challenged based on the subsequent lawful compounding of the offense by the victim. The petitioner argued that the High Court's inherent power under Section 561A, Cr. P. C., could be invoked to review the order due to the new facts presented.

3. The court deliberated on the power to review its previous order of summary dismissal. The petitioner's counsel contended that the offense being lawfully compounded prior to the dismissal should warrant a review under the inherent jurisdiction of the court. However, the court referred to a Supreme Court decision emphasizing the finality of orders of dismissal passed by the High Court.

4. The judgment distinguished between the dismissal of a criminal revision for default and the summary dismissal after a hearing. While the former might allow for restoration and re-hearing, the latter, as per the Supreme Court decision, was considered final and not subject to review. The court allowed the revision petition of Lachman Sindhi, setting aside his conviction and sentence due to the lawful compounding of the offense.

In conclusion, the High Court rejected the review plea of Namdeo Sindhi and Puranmal Sindhi, directing them to serve the remaining sentence. The court allowed the revision in part, acquitting Lachman Sindhi based on the compounding of the offense.