Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

12. Section 421 which enacts a power to summarily dismiss any appeal. Section 423 provides many powers. They are as follows: Sub-Section (1)-Dismissal of any appeal after hear, ing. Sub-Section (1) (a)-In appeals against acquittal the reversal of the acquittal: the ordering of a further inquiry, a retrial or a committal, conviction and sentence; (b) In appeals against conviction: the reversal of the finding of conviction, the altering of the finding of conviction, the reversal of the sentence, the bringing in of a finding of acquittal, the ordering of a discharge, the ordering of a retrial, or of a committal, the reduction of sentence, the alteration of a sentence to one of another kind, (the enhancement of sentence is a matter which is expressly excluded from the purview of ap. pellate powers); (c) the reversal or alteration of any other appealable order; (d) the making of consequential and incidental orders, and the making of amendments. I shall return to Clause (d) presently. Section 418 (1) expressly bars any appeal on fact when the trial was by jury. Section 423 (2) expressly lays down one application of the Rule contained in Section 418 (1) by enacting that the Court has no power to alter or reverse the verdict of a jury except for an error of law of a particular kind i.e., a misdirection by the Judge, or a misunderstanding on the part of the jury of the law as laid down by the Judge such as to have occasioned an erroneous verdict. But clearly this provision is controlled by Section 418 (1), for it is beyond dispute that there are errors of law of another kind which would, when committed by the Court below, also entitle the High Court in appeal to set aside the verdict, e. g., omission to cross-examine a witness or omission to examine an accused person under Section 342, Criminal P.C. or material error in the charge framed.

60. I shall now give my reasons for this view. The powers of a Court of Justice are of a twofold nature: Firstly, it is given power to entertain certain matters and investigate them in a certain manner in Order that justice may be done. Secondly, it is given power to grant certain reliefs by passing particular orders and directions after it has entertained and investigated those matters. The Criminal Procedure Code recognises this distinction and deals with each kind of power separately. So far as the powers of this Court on appeal are concerned, the two main Sections are Section 418 and Section 423. Section 418 deals with the first kind of power arid Section 423 with the second kind. Section 418 is as follows:

Nothing herein contained shall authorise the Court to alter or reverse the verdict of a jury, unless it is of opinion that such verdict is erroneous owing to a misdirection by the Judge, or to a misunderstanding on the part of the jury of the law as laid down by him.
I would draw attention to the words "Nothing herein contained shall authorise the Court." The Sub-Section does not empower the Court to do anything, nor does it limit the Court's powerSection All it does is to explain that the first part of Section 423 does not authorise the Court to do certain things. The reason why the first part of Section 423 does not authorise the doing of these things is to be found in Section 418. Section 423 (2) therefore merely explains Section 423 (1) with reference to the limitations contained in Section 418. It is purely explanatory and is there 'ex abundanti cautela.' What it says in affect is this: Section 418 limits an appeal in a case tried by a jury to a matter of law; therefore any and every erroneous verdict cannot be altered, reversed or set aside; it can only be altered, reversed or set aside if the error is due to a misdirection by the Judge or a misunderstanding of the law by the jury. Even if Section 423 (2) were not there, the appellate Court would still not have the power to set aside a verdict of the jury unless there was an error of law as this limitation on the power of the appellate Court has already been imposed by Section 418.

63. I may point out further that it would be wrong to suppose that Sub-Section (2) of Section 423 prescribes the limits of the power of an appellate Court to interfere with a conviction when the trial was by jury. The appellate Court may set aside an Order of conviction passed in a trial by jury for many reasons other than those mentioned in Section 423 (2). Even when there is no erroneous verdict by reason of any misdirection or misunderstanding, the appellate Court may yet set aside the verdict on other grounds of law, e. g., misjoinder of charges, defects in the empanelling of jurors, failure to examine an accused person under Section 342, Criminal P.C. and various other grounds of law. It seems to me clear that Section 423 does not deal with the first kind of power of the Court of appeal, viz., the power to entertain appeals and to investigate questions of fact or law when entertaining appeals. That is a matter dealt with by Section 418. Section 423 merely prescribes the different reliefs that the appellate Court may grant after entertaining an appeal and investigating matters in the manner prescribed and limited by Section 418.