KATHI BHUPAT MADHUBHAI Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) We have heard learned counsel Mr.Rahul Dholakiya and Mr.J.K. Shah, learned APP for the respective parties.

(2.) The petitioner came to be convicted for the offence of rape and he was sentenced to undergo two years imprisonment. By preferring the appeal before the Sessions Judge, the conviction being challenged by the accused. The Additional Sessions Judge, while dismissing the appeal, upheld the order of conviction. Against this, the present revision being filed by the accused. At the time of admission of the revision, by exercising powers conferred by virtue of Ss. 397 and 401 of Cr.P.C., the learned Single Judge of this Court, on the aspect of inadequacy of the sentence, issued notice to the accused and directed the Registry to place the matter before the Division Bench. Admittedly, pending the revision, the accused has undergone two years of his imprisonment and the present revision filed by the accused having become infructuous. However, on the issue of enhancement of sentence, the matter still pending for its adjudication.

(3.) Mr.Rahul Dholakiya, learned counsel by referring the case of Nagarajan Vs. State of Tamilnadu (Criminal Appeal No.2892-93 of 2025, SC, dtd. 4/6/2025), contended that the High Court cannot exercise its revisional powers for enhancement of sentence and therefore, in the revision filed by the accused, the High Court cannot exercise its power under Sec. 397 read with Sec. 401 of Cr.P.C. and enhance the sentence awarded by the Court concerned.