THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No. 2123 OF 2011 ORDER: The petitioner preferred the present revision against the judgment dated 20.08.2009 rendered by the Special Sessions Judge-cum-IV Additional Sessions Judge, Guntur in Criminal Appeal No. 76 of 2008, which was ﬁled against the judgment dated 05.03.2008 in C.C.No. 249 of 2003 on the ﬁle of the Additional Junior Civil Judge, Ponnur. The petitioner (Accused No.3) along with the other accused Nos. 1 and 2 was convicted and sentenced to undergo Rigorous imprisonment for one year and are sentenced to pay a ﬁne of Rs.200/- in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for three months each for the oﬀence punishable under Section 467 I.P.C. In the appeal ﬁled there against, the learned Sessions Judge passed the order as follows: “ In the result, the appeal is allowed and judgment and conviction in C.C.No. 249 of 2003 on the ﬁle of Additional Junior Civil Judge, Ponnur dated 05.03.2008 is set aside and the matter is remitted back to the trial Court, the Investigating Oﬃcer should be directed to further investigate and a copy of the Judgement shall be communicated to the Superintendent of Police to instruct a responsible oﬃcer to take up special interest in the matter and in prosecuting the case.” The said judgment is under challenge before this Court. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor for the respondent. Section 386 of the Code of Criminal Procedure deals with the power of the appellate Court, which reads as follows: “386. Power of the Appellate Court: After perusing such record and hearing the appellant or his pleader, if he appears and the Public Prosecutor if he appears, and in case of an appeal under Section 377 or Section 378, the accused if he appears, the Appellate Court may, if it considers that there is no suﬃcient ground for interfering, dismiss the appeal, or may (a) in an appeal from an order of acquittal, reverse such order and direct that further inquiry be made, or that the accused be re-tried or committed for trial, as the case may be, or ﬁnd him guilty and pass sentence on him according to law; (b) in an appeal from a conviction- (i) reverse the ﬁnding and sentence and acquit or discharge the accused, or order him to be re-tried by a Court of competent jurisdiction subordinate to such Appellate Court or committed for trial, or (ii) alter the ﬁnding, maintaining the sentence, or (iii) with or without altering the ﬁnding, alter the nature or the extent, or the nature and extent, of the sentence but not so as to enhance the same; (c) in an appeal for enhancement of sentence- (i) reverse the ﬁnding and sentence and acquit or discharge the accused or order him to be re-tried by a Court competent to try the offence, or (ii) alter the ﬁnding maintaining the sentence, or (iii) with or without altering the ﬁnding, alter the nature or the extent, or the nature and extent, of the sentence, so as to enhance or reduce the same; (d) in an appeal from an of other order, alter or reverse such order; (e) make any amendment or any consequential or incidental order that may be just or proper: Provided that the sentence shall not be enhanced unless the accused has had an opportunity of showing cause against such enhancement: Provided further that the Appellate Court shall not inﬂict greater punishment for the oﬀence which in its opinion the accused has committed, than might have been inﬂicted for that oﬀence by the Court passing the order or sentence under appeal.” It is evident from the said provision that the appellate Court, on ﬁling of appeal against the conviction, shall either allow the appeal or dismiss the appeal or reduce the sentence, or remit the case for further trial. Nowhere it is mentioned that the appellate Court has power to direct the Investigating Oﬃcer, while remitting the case to the trial Court, for conducting further investigation. Hence, the judgment rendered by the learned Sessions Judge to the extent “in the result, the appeal is allowed and the conviction in C.C.No. 249 of 2003 on the ﬁle of the Additional Junior Civil Judge, Ponnur dated 05.03.2008 is set aside”, shall stand conﬁrmed and the remaining portion of the judgment is hereby set aside. In the result, the challenge made by the petitioner in connection with the order for retrial of the said C.C.No. 249 of 2003 is hereby set aside. No costs. __________________________ JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO Dated : 24.10.2011 ksld