AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
S.S. Satheesachandran, J.—Petitioner is a convicted accused. His conviction has been affirmed in appeal and revision but with some modification over the sentence imposed. He has filed the above petition invoking the inherent jurisdiciton of this Court u/s 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, for short, ''the Code'', to issue direction to the Magistrate to keep in abeyance the execution of sentence against him. His case is that he has applied for getting certified copies of the depositions of the witnesses, to prefer a SLP before the Apex Court to assail his conviction, but the same has not been suggested. Inherent powers of this court cannot be exercised in a case of this nature, to subvert any order passed by the Court, which has become final. Exercise of inherent jurisdiction is permissible only to give effect to the orders of the court, or to prevent abuse of process of the court, or to secure the ends of justice. When a conviction rendered against petitioner has been affirmed and sealed with finality, which may be open to further challenge by way of a Special Leave Petition, that cannot be set forth a ground invoking the inherent jurisdiction of this Court to keep in abeyance the execution of the sentence. There is no merit in the petition, and it is dismissed.