Meghalaya High Court
Shri. Waniakyrshanborlang Makdoh vs . State Of Meghalaya on 23 June, 2025
Author: W. Diengdoh
Bench: W. Diengdoh
Serial No. 03
Regular List
HIGH COURT OF MEGHALAYA
AT SHILLONG
Crl.Rev.P. No. 15 of 2022
Date of Order: 23.06.2025
Shri. Waniakyrshanborlang Makdoh Vs. State of Meghalaya
Coram:
Hon'ble Mr. Justice W. Diengdoh, Judge
Appearance:
For the Petitioner/Appellant(s) : Mr. K. Paul, Sr. Adv. with
Ms. B. Kharwanlang, Adv.
Mr. S. Thapa, Adv.
For the Respondent(s) : Mr. K. Khan, P.P with
Mr. S. Sengupta, Addl. P.P
Heard Mr. K. Paul, learned Sr. counsel assisted by Ms. B. Kharwanlang,
learned counsel and Mr. S. Thapa, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner.
Also heard Mr. K. Khan, learned P.P assisted by Mr. S. Sengupta, learned Addl.
P.P appearing for the State respondent.
Before this instant criminal revision petition is to be admitted, the
question arises as to whether a revision application can be filed against an order
of conviction and sentence passed by a criminal court of competent jurisdiction
where the punishment imposed is below 7(seven) years and the next question
arises as to whether on revision being preferred, the High Court can exercise
appellate power to inter alia, appreciate the evidence on record while
considering the merits of the case.
To answer these questions, Mr. K. Paul, learned Sr. counsel has firstly
led this Court to the provision of Section 397 Cr.P.C where the High Court or
1
any Sessions Judge is competent to call for and examine the records of any
proceedings before any inferior court within its jurisdiction primarily to satisfy
itself as to the correctness, legality or propriety of any finding, sentence or order
(emphasized) of the proceeding before the inferior court.
Section 401 Cr.P.C has invested the High Court with powers of appeal
wherein it is provided that the High court in its discretion may exercise any of
the powers of a Court of Appeal when the records of such proceeding of the
trial court are brought before it.
To buttress this contention, the learned Sr. counsel has also referred to
the case of State of Maharashtra v. Jagmohan Singh Kuldip Singh Anand &
Ors., AIR 2004 SC 4412 at para 22 wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court has
observed as follows:
“22. The Revisional Court is empowered to exercise all the powers
conferred on the Appellate Court by virtue of the provisions contained in
Section 410 Cr.P.C. Section 401 Cr.P.C. is a provision enabling the High
Court to exercise all powers of Appellate Court, if necessary, in aid of
power of superintendence or supervision as a part of power of revision
conferred on the High Court or Sessions Court. Section 397, Cr.P.C.
confers power on the High Court or Sessions Court, as the case may be,
“for the purpose of satisfying itself or himself as to the correctness,
legality or propriety of any finding, sentence or order, recorded or passed
and as to the regularity of any proceeding of such inferior court.” It is for
the above purpose, if necessary, the High Court or Sessions Court can
exercise all appellate powers. Section 401, Cr.P.C. conferring powers of
Appellate Court on the Revisional Court is with the above limited
purpose. The provisions contained in Section 395 to Section 401, Cr.P.C.,
read together, do not indicate that the revisional power of the High Court
can be exercised as a second appellate power.”
Mr. K. Khan, learned P.P in all fairness has no counter contention to the
proposition proffered by the learned Sr. counsel for the petitioner and has
agreed that this criminal revision application if admitted, this Court may
appreciate evidence therein exercising its appellate power.
The submission of the learned Sr. counsel for the petitioner as well as
2
that of the learned P.P are lucid enough for this Court to understand that the
issue of jurisdiction raised initially has been settled inasmuch as it is now clear
that this Court can exercise its appellate jurisdiction though to a limited extent
whenever a criminal revision application is under consideration before it.
At this juncture, the learned Sr. counsel has made his submission as far
as the merits of the case is concerned to say that the petitioner is aggrieved by
the judgment dated 20.12.2021 and the related order of sentence dated
22.12.2021 wherein the petitioner on being convicted, was sentenced to
undergo imprisonment of 5(five) years for the offence under Section 7/9(n)/10
of the POCSO Act and Section 447 IPC. Being thus aggrieved by the imposition
of such sentence and order of conviction, the petitioner has approached this
Court with a prayer inter alia, for setting aside and to quash the said order of
conviction and sentence.
Mr. K. Khan, learned P.P has also submitted that this application is
required to be heard on merits and has no objection, if the same is admitted.
Accordingly, on consideration of the submission made, this Court is
convinced that the application be admitted and is done so here.
The related records of the trial court are hereby directed to be produced
before this Court within 2(two) weeks.
List accordingly.
Judge
Meghalaya
23.06.2025
“Tiprilynti-PS”
3