CHAKRAPANI PANDEY Vs. STATE OF M P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner by way of this revision assailed the order passed he Additional Sessions Judge, Rewa, in Criminal Appeal No. 194/2010 whereby, while considering the appeal filed by the appellant in Criminal Case No. 488/2010 wherein, they were convicted for the offence under Section 379 and 411 of IPC though other co-accused persons were acquitted, the case was remanded back for retail against the present petitioner vide impugned order. The petitioner was asked to appear before the trial Court to face the trial afresh.

(2.) The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that such an order could not have been passed by the Appellate Court inasmuch as, the impact of the order is that the entire trial stands revived and the other persons who have been acquitted may also face trial. Even though no appeal has been filed against them by the State against acquittal has referred to the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court delivered in the case of State of West Bengal and another Vs. Laisal Hague and others, 1989 3 SCC 166. In the said case dealing with the similar situation the Hon'ble Supreme Court passed the following order:

(3.) In the aforesaid judgment there is also a reference to another judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court delivered in the case of State of Karnataka Vs. Narsa Reddy, 1987 4 SCC 170 relevant paragraph of that judgment, which is also relevant for the disposal of this case is reproduce here as under: