Accused Can Challenge Conviction In Appeal Filed By The State Even If He Did Not Prefer A Formal Appeal: SC [Read Judgment]

The Supreme Court has observed that an accused can challenge the finding and order of conviction in the appeal filed by the State, even though the said accused he had not preferred a formal appeal.

The Rajasthan High Court had converted the conviction of one of the accused in a murder case (Mehram) from under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code into one under Section 326, IPC. The State preferred the appeal against this judgment seeking restoration of his conviction under Section 302, IPC and to award him sentence of life imprisonment.

Relying on Chandrakant Patil vs. State through CBI , Sumer Singh vs. Surajbhan Singh & Ors. , State of Rajasthan vs. Ramanand and Section 377(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the accused's counsel contend that he had a right to challenge the finding of guilt and conviction under Section 326 and 148, IPC, recorded against him, even though the said accused had not preferred a formal appeal against the impugned judgment. Agreeing with the said contention, the bench comprising of Justices AM Khanwilkar and Dinesh Maheshwari said:

The accused No. 5 (Mehram S/o Chhagna Ram) is justified in contending that it is open to the said accused to challenge the finding and order of conviction under Section 326/148, IPC recorded against him in the appeal filed by the State, assailing the impugned judgment of the High Court. That being the settled legal position, as expounded in Chandrakant Patil (supra), Sumer Singh (supra) and Ramanand (supra) including Section 377(3) of the Cr.P.C., which predicates that in the appeal filed against the sentence on the ground of its inadequacy, the accused may plead for his acquittal or for reduction of the sentence.

However, the Court allowed the appeal partly, and convicted the accused for offence punishable under Section 304 Part I and Section 148, IPC. He was sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for ten (10) years for offence punishable under Section 304 Part I and six (6) months' simple imprisonment for offence punishable under Section 148.  

Case no.: CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1894/2010  Case name: State of Rajasthan vs Mehram & Ors.
Coram: Justices AM Khanwilkar and Dinesh Maheshwari
Counsel:  Sr. Advocates Dr. Manish Singhvi and  Sushil Kumar Jain 

Click here to Read/Download Judgment

Read Judgment