An appellate court may set aside a conviction and order a retrial under Section 386 Cr.P.C. (Section 427 BNSS) if the trial record contains contradictory pleas regarding guilt and the right to be tried, ensuring the defendant's right to a fair trial.

JUDGMENT AND ORDER (ORAL)

(M. Sundar, CJ)

[1] The following abbreviations/short forms are used in this order :

[2] Captioned criminal appeal is directed against a judgment and order dated 27th September, 2018 in S.T. Case No. 8 of 2017 on the file of the Court of Sessions Judge, Ukhrul. This ‘27.09.2018 judgment and order’ is being referred to as ‘impugned judgment’ and the Court which made the impugned judgment i.e., the ‘Court of Sessions Judge, Ukhrul’ is being referred to as ‘said Sessions Court’ both for the sake of convenience and clarity.

[3] In the hearing today, Mr. A. Gautam Sharma, learned counsel on record for the sole appellant and Mr. RK Umakanta, learned senior advocate and State Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of Mr. W. Niranjit Singh, learned State Counsel for the sole respondent are before this Court (physical court).

[4] The main criminal appeal was taken up with the consent of learned counsel on both sides.

[5] Short facts, shorn off elaboration i.e., factual matrix in a nutshell containing facts imperative for appreciating this order are that the impugned judgment is one of conviction, convicting the appellant to rigorous imprisonment for life and fine of fifty thousand rupees to be realized from his wages of rigorous imprisonment and paid to the complainant; that it is to be noted that this sentence/punishment has been awarded to the appellant for an alleged offence under Section 300 IPC punishable under Section 302 IPC; that the alleged occurrence was on 10.08.2013; that the impugned order proceeds on the basis that the appellant pleaded guilty when the charge was read out and explained to the appellant and asked whether he pleads guilty of the offence charged or claims to be tried; that the captioned appeal has been presented in this Court on 27.10.2025.

[6] As regards the impugned judgment, it records that the charge (charge for an offence punishable under Section 302 of IPC) for the alleged offence of assaulting the victim (to be noted victim is stepmother of appellant) with the intention of causing death by using a dao with bamboo handle, appellant pleaded guilty but in the same breath the impugned judgment has also recorded that the appellant pleaded for having the case tried in accordance with law.

[7] As regards sentence, the impugned judgment records that the appellant sought to consider vide Section 304 part II of IPC whereas the Prosecutor sought awarding sentence vide Section 302 of IPC but there is no discussion about sentencing in the impugned judgment.

[8] This Court had the benefit of perusing copies of the charge and the plea of the accused. A scanned reproduction of this part of the record as placed before this Court by the learned Prosecutor is as follows:

[9] A careful perusal of the question and answer recorded by the Sessions Court brings to light that it has been recorded that the appellant pleaded guilty but however, he wanted to be tried according to law.

[10] Faced with the above scenario, learned Prosecutor very fairly consented to