1. We are agreed in thinking that the question whether the High Court, when exercising its powers of Criminal Revision, has inherent power to award costs to the successful party, has been settled by the decision of the Full Bench in Sankaralingam Mudaliar v. Narayana Mudaliar (1922) I L K 45 M 913 : 43 MLJ 369 (FB). Meanwhile the amendment of the Criminal Procedure Code has not made any difference, since the Legislature has not acted upon the suggestion thrown out by Coutts-Trotter, J., who sat upon the abovementioned Full Bench, that in order to check the activities of private prosecutors in revision proceedings the Court should be invested with power in proper cases to award costs. It is true that Section 561-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure which deals with the inherent power of the High Court is new. But as observed by the learned Chief Justice in Sankaralinga Mudaliar v. Narayana Mudaliar (1922) I L K 45 M 913 : 43 MLJ 369 (FB), the Court cannot by invoking its inherent powers extend the powers given to it by Statute.. Nor can the award of costs be treated as incidental or consequential to the disposal of the revision petition within the meaning of Section 423 (1922