The main legal point established in the judgment is the clarification of the powers of the Sessions Court and the High Court in revision under the relevant sections of the Code of Criminal Procedure, emphasizing the circumstances under which a revision against sentence lies in the Sessions Court.

N.K. Jain, J. - This petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is directed against the judgment dated 9.8.2001, passed by Illrd Addl. Sessions Judge, Indorc, in Criminal Revision No.448/2000, dismissing petitions aforesaid revision for enhancement of sentences solely on the ground that the Sessions Court has no power to enhance the sentence.

2. On a complaint made by the petitioner under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, accused-respondent Manoj Jain was convicted and sentenced to pay fine Rs. 2500/- as also the compensation by Judicial Magistrate First Class, Indore, in Criminal Case No. 31/1999. Dissatisfied with the quantum of sentence, complainant-petitioners preferred revision (Cr. Rev. No. 546/2000) before this Court. In the meanwhile, the accused respondent filed appeal (No. 221/2000) against his conviction in the Sessions Court, Indore, which was ultimately made over the Illrd ASJ, Indore. On being informed about filing of the appeal by the accused respondent, this Court vide its order dated 16.11.2000, transferred the petitioners aforesaid revision to the Sessions Court for being heard together with the appeal filed by the respondent. The said revision was then registered in the Court below at No. 448/2000, Learned ASJ by a common judgement dated 9.8.2001 dismissed both, the appeal of respondent and the revision of the complaint-petitioners. While the appeal was dismissed on merits, the revision was dismissed solely on the ground that the Sessions Court has no jurisdiction to entertain a revision for enhancement of sentence. The learned ASJ placed reliance on a decision of this Court in Kalloo Khan. 2000(3) MPL.J 384.

3. I have heard Mr. R.S. Chhabra, Learned Counsel for the petitioners and Mr. M.D. Sinha, learned Counsel for the respondent.

4. This revision in may judgment must succeed. The ratio in Kalloo Khan (supra), I am afraid, was not available in the instant case.

5. Section 397 empowers the High Court or any Sessions Court to call for and examine the records of an inferior Court for the purpose of satisfying themselves as to the legality and regularity of any proceedings or the order made therein. On such examination when any illegality or irregularity is found, the machinery for exercise of power is provided in Sections 398 to 402. On a reading of Section 397,399,401 and 402 in juxtaposition, it will be seen that a concurrent jurisdiction is vested on the High Court and the Sessions Court in the matter of revision under Section 397(1).

6. In order to appreciate the aforesaid legal position. It would be appropriate to read Sections 399 and 401 of the Code which provide for the powers of the Sessions Court and the High Court in revision:

"399. Sessions's Judge's powers of revision.- (1) In the case of any proceeding the record of which has been called for by himself, the Sessions Judge may exercise all or any of the powers which may be exercised by the High Court under Sub-section (1) of Section 401.

(2)..…….

( 3 ) ..…..

401. High Court's powers of revision.- (1) In the case of any proceeding the record of which has been called for by itself or which otherwise comes to its knowledge, the High Court may, in its discretion exercise any of the powers conferred on a Court of Appeal by Section 386, 389, 390 and 391 or on a Court of Session by Section 307 and when the Judges composing the Court of revisions are equally divided in opinion, the case shall be disposed of in the manner provided by Section 392.

( 2 ) ....

7. It will be thus seen that the Sessions Court has all the powers which may be exercised by the High Court under Sub-section (1) of Section 401. Under Sub-section (1) of Section 401, the High Court can exercise powers conferred on a Court of Appeal by Sections 386, 389, 390 and 391 or on a Court of Sessions by Section 307. The only rider is that where under the Code an appeal lies and no appeal is brought, no proceeding by way of revision shall be entertained at