MAHESH KUMAR SHARMA Vs. RAJKUMAR SHARMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The short question involved in this criminal revision filed under Sec. 397 read with Sec. 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short the "CrPC") is:

(2.) The aforesaid question of law arising for consideration on the following factual backdrop:

(3.) Ms. Fauzia Mirza, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the applicant/accused submits that in an appeal preferred by the applicant/accused against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence, passed by the criminal Court, the learned appellate Court have committed grave legal error while directing him to pay enhanced amount of compensation to the non-applicant/complainant for the reason that Sec. 386(b)(iii) of CrPC only empowers the appellate Court to alter the nature or the extent, or the nature and extent of the sentence, but not to enhance the sentence. She vehemently argued that by virtue of sub-sec. (3) of Sec. 357 of CrPC, though the appellate Court can exercise its power in awarding compensation, but since in the present case fine of Rs.5,000.00 had already been imposed upon the applicant/accused by the criminal Court, the appellate Court could not have exercised powers conferred under Sec. 357(3) read with 386(b)(iii) of CrPC. As such, the impugned order is liable to be set aside.