AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
L.K. Mishra, J.—Heard
Mr. S.K. Sahoo, Learned Counsel for the Petitioner and Mr. P. Pattnaik, Learned Addl. Government Advocate.
Learned Court below has convicted the Petitioners for the offence u/s 323/34 I.P.C. and sentenced them to pay a fine of Rs. 100 each in default to undergo S.I. for 15 days. Since no Appeal is maintainable against the sentence, the Petitioners have filed this Revision.
Though very many points have been urged in support of the Revision, but on perusal of the record it is run that the case can be disposed of on a solitary point. The Learned Court below relying on the decision of the Apex Court in Gangula Ashok and Anr. v. State of A.P., (2000) 18 OCR 364 held that the Court of Session cannot take cognizance of any offence directly without the case being committed to it by a Magistrate as per the bar provided u/s 193 Code of Criminal Procedure and in that view of the matter, conviction u/s 3(1)(ix) of the S.C. and S.T. (P.A.) Act, 1989 is not maintainable. The Learned Court below lost sight of the fact that a conviction u/s 323 I.P.C. is also not maintainable on the self same ground since all other factors are same. I, therefore, do not find the impugned judgment and order of conviction to be sustainable.
The impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence are hereby set aside and the Revision is allowed.
Revision allowed.