9911796707
TMI Blog1984 (4) TMI 56X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fenders Act on a personal bond and two sureties. The applicant did not prefer any appeal against such conviction and sentence. The State preferred a revision No. 1160 of 1983 against the sentence and the revisional court vide its order and judgment dated 9-12-1983 set aside the order of the Magistrate granting probation and remanded the case to the trial court directing that court to pass sentence ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hen any appeal assailing the conviction was not preferred nor the conviction was challenged. The revisional court was concerned with a limited question of sentence alone on account of State having filed a revision for alteration of the sentence. The revisional court, once revision is entertained, is vested with the jurisdiction to pass any orders concerning the sentence. In fact, the applicant has ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the U.P. First Offenders Act, made a reference in revision. It was held that it is proper to send back the case to the trial court which may award suitable sentence to the accused because then accused would have a right to appeal. The case was remanded back by this Court to the Additional Sessions Judge. This authority is on all fours and I do not find any force in the argument that the revisi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... plicant will have his remedy after the trial court has complied with the orders of the remand and passed any sentence. I have not discussed the case on merits because I am of the view that no interference under Section 482 Cr. P C can be made when conviction was not challenged in spite of remedy of appeal being available. The application under Section 482 Cr. P.C. is, therefore, rejected. - ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
