Under subsection 1 of section 401 , the High Court can exercise power conferred on a court of appeal by section s 386, 389,390 and 391 or on a court of Session by section 307. The only rider is that where under the Code an appeal lies and no appeal is brought, no proceedings by way of Revision shall be entertained at the instance of the party' who could have applied.

At this stage it was necessary to read section 377and 386 of Crpc which deal with appeal against sentence and powers to be exercised in such an appeal. Section 377 provides that the State Government may in any case of conviction on a trial held by any Court other than a High Court can present an appeal to the High Court against the sentence on the ground of its inadequacy Clause (C) of Section 386 further empowers the High Court to alter a sentence with or without altering the finding of guilt, so as to enhance or reduce the same. The very power s of the High Court under section 401 can with the aid of Section 399(1) be exercised by the Session Court.

As already pointed out,no revision would lie at the instance of a party who could have appealed. In the instant case ,no appeal against the sentence could be preferred by the complainant - petitioner's as an appeal against sentence under Section 377 can be presented by the State Government alone. The prosecution in the instant case was launched by a private party not by the State Government alone.

The prosecution in the instant case was launched by a private party not by the State Government preferring an appeal in the matter. Under the circumstances, the complainant petitioner s were Fully empowered to prefer a revision against the sentence either in the High court or in the Session Court, as provided by section s 397, 399 and 401,Crpc.

The ASJ clearly misconstrued the aforesaid legal provisions in holding that no revision against sentence lies in the Session Court. In fact an aggrieved party has been given an option to choose any of the two forums, for filling Revision.