Ultimate magazine theme for WordPress.

A court docket shall not convict an individual with out correct scrutiny of the matter

A court shall not convict a person without proper scrutiny of the matter written by Himanshu Garg student of Maharashtra National Law University Aurangabad



A man Shivnath Prasad (Appellant) was arrested for rash and negligent driving under section 279 and 304A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. The Appellant was convicted for simple imprisonment for six months and one year by the lower court. He filed an appeal before Additional District and Sessions Judge but the court also convicted and sentenced the appellant. Now, the appellant filed an appeal before the Hon’ble Supreme Court challenging the order of the Single Judge Bench of the Patna High Court.


  • Whether appellant convicted and sentenced under section 279 and 304A of IPC was justified?
  • Whether the lower and High Court convict person with proper evidence of matter?



Learned counsel of Appellant said in the Hon’ble Supreme Court that there are many disabilities which the High Court did not notice:

  • The post-mortem report of the deceased person is not available.
  • The investigating officer, Doctor, and the informant were not examined.
  • There are also prosecution witness-3 who stated that he is the son of the deceased person and not the informant.
  • The prosecution witness-4 claimed to be an eye witness of the crime but he was not examined during the trial.
  • It is crucial to note that the prosecution lawyer has mentioned there being five eyewitnesses while three of their statements were not in support of the prosecution.
  • Learned counsel of the appellant also said that the Hon’ble High Court arrived at its decision without performing all of the necessary scrutinies. It is not valid according to section 397 and 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
  • According to section 397 of Cr. P.C. “The High Court or any Sessions Judge may call for and examine the record of any proceeding before any inferior Criminal Court situated within its local jurisdiction for the purpose of satisfying itself or himself; to the correctness, legality or propriety of any finding, sentence or order, recorded or passed, and as to the regularity of any proceedings of such inferior Court.”
  • And according to section 401 of Cr. P.C. the High Court has ‘power of revision’. And it is necessary for the interests of Justice so to do, the High Court may treat the application for revision as a petition of appeal and deal with the same accordingly.
  • By all the argument of the learned counsel of the Appellant, finally, the Hon’ble Supreme Court dismissed the order of the High Court and remit the matter for fresh consideration in accordance with the law.

Comments are closed.