The main legal point established in the judgment is that the Court of Session does not have the power to entertain a revision for enhancement of sentence.

S. NAGAMUTHU, J.

1. The petitioners in the criminal revision are the accused in CC.No.10403/1995 on the file of the learned II Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, Chennai. The Labour Welfare Officer, III Circle, Chennai, filed a private complaint against the revision petitioners for an offence u/s.29 of the Industrial Disputes Act. The learned Magistrate took cognizance of the offence on the said complaint and then proceeded to try the case against the revision petitioners. The learned Magistrate convicted the revision petitioners and imposed a fine of Rs.1,000/- each. The respondents 2 and 3 in this revision were aggrieved by the same. They are the workmen and P.Ws.2 and 4 before the trial court. Seeking to enhance the said sentence, they filed a revision before this court. This court in turn, forwarded the said revision for enhancement of sentence to the Court of Additional District Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No.I, Chennai where the revision petitioners had already preferred an appeal against conviction. The criminal revision filed by the respondents 2 and 3 in the present revision was taken up in Crl.Rc.No.34 of 2005 before the Fast Track Court. The learned Sessions Judge ultimately confirmed the conviction and, however, enhanced the punishment by enhancing the fine amount to Rs.5,000/- each. The revision petitioners herein who are the accused in the said case are still aggrieved. Therefore, they have come up with Crl.Rc.No.8/2009.

2. The respondents 2 and 3in this revision who were the revision petitioners in Crl.Rc.No.34/2005 before the Sessions Court are also aggrieved by the quantum of sentence though enhanced by the Sessions Court.Seeking further enhancement, they have come up with Crl.OP.No.8025/2008.That is how both Crl.Rc.No.8/2009 at the instance of the accused and Crl.OP.No.8025/2008 at the instance of the private parties are before this court for consideration.

3. An important question arose before this court as to whether the court of Session has got power to entertain a revision for enhancement of sentence. Mr.B.Kumar, the learned senior counsel appearing for the accused submitted that such revision before the Court of Session for enhancement of sentence at the instance of a third party is not at all maintainable. However, Mr.K.M.Ramesh, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners in Crl.OP.No.8025/2008, who are the witnesses in the case, would submit that such revision for enhancement of sentence before the Court of Session is maintainable in view of what is contained in section 399 Code of Criminal Procedure. He would further submit that though revision was filed before this court by him rightly, it is this court which passed an order forwarding the revision to the Court of Session and therefore, the petitioners in the criminal original petition should not be deprived of their right to have effective contest in the case. It was also brought to my notice that there are two judgments on this aspect by two learned Judges of this court. The first one is the judgment in JANANI ADVERTISING COUNSEL REP.BY ITS PROPRIETOR R.RAMANUJAM Vs. BENEFIT COLMAN & CO. LTD REP. BY ITS ASSISTANT MANAGER [RESPONSE] C.P.RAGHVAN reported in 2002-2-L.W.-[CrL.] 549 wherein the learned Single Judge has taken the view that such revision for enhancement of sentence before the Court of Session is maintainable. To come to the said conclusion, the learned Judge has referred to a Full Bench Judgment of this court in 1995 – 1-L.W.-[Crl.] 403 [THE ASSISTANT COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS Vs. NANDIKARA KUMARAN] , wherein the Full Bench has held as follows:-

"When a decision of the Division Bench of this court is contrary to a ruling of the Supreme Court, the view of the Division Bench is not good law. As per Article 141 of the Constitution, the law declared by the Supreme Court is binding on all Courts including High Courts. In this matter, the decisions of the Supreme Court are clearly to the effect that a revision petition for enhance