ORDER

Leave granted.

2. This appeal is filed against the judgment and order dated 18th July, 2001 passed by the High Court of Kerala in Crl.R.P. No. 62 of 1994 allowing the revision application filed by PW1 de facto complainant.

3. In the present case, the principal assistant sessions judge, Thiruvananthapuram by his judgment and order dated 18th January, 1992, convicted accused Nos. 1 to 11 and sentenced them for the offences under sections 143, 147, 148 and 307 read with section 149 IPC. The sessions judge, Thiruvananthapuram, after appreciating the evidence allowed the criminal appeal No.24 of 1992 and acquitted the accused for the offences for which they were charged. In revision application filed by PW1-de facto complainant, the High Court set aside the order of sessions judge. Hence, this appeal.

4. Mr. U.R. Lalit, learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants submitted that the order passed by the High Court is, on the face of it, illegal and erroneous as the High Court has exceeded its revisional jurisdiction conferred under section 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. It is his submission that it is well settled law that High Court can exercise/invoke its revi