1 cri.rev.appln.304-98 mgn IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO.304 of 1998 Simon D’Souza ..Applicant Vs. The State of Maharashtra & Anr. ..Respondents Mr. A.V. Singh, for the applicant. Mr.H.J. Dedhia, APP for the State. CORAM: B. H. MARLAPALLE & A.M. THIPSAY, JJ. DATED: 22nd March, 2011 P.C. The applicant was examined as P.W.8 in N.D.P.S. Special Case No. 194 of 1995 which was decided on 28th August, 1998. The learned Special Judge issued a show cause notice to the applicant under Section 344 of Cr.P.C., and the applicant submitted his reply thereto vide Exhibit 4. Summary proceedings as contemplated under Section 344 of Cr.P.C., commenced with recording of the applicant’s plea at Exhibit 5 on 3rd November, 1998. The prosecution chose to rely upon the evidence already led in the trial and presented the witnesses for cross examination vide 2 cri.rev.appln.304-98 pursis at Exhibit 6. The applicant dispensed with cross examination of the prosecution witnesses. His statement under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. was recorded at Exhibit 7 and he had stoutly denied the prosecution charge. After hearing both the parties the learned Special Judge was pleased to hold the applicant guilty of knowingly or willingly giving false evidence in N.D.P.S. Special Case No.194 of 1995 and he was sentenced to undergo R.I. For a period of 15 days and and to pay a fine of Rs.500/- and in default of payment of fine to undergo further sentence of 15 days R.I., as per order dated 30th November, 1998. This order of conviction and sentence is the subject matter of challenge in this application which came to be admitted on 23rd December, 1998. 2. Section 351 of Cr.P.C., states that an order of conviction and sentence passed under Section 344 is an appealable order, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code and as per Section 401 of the said Code no revision will lie against an appealable order and if appeal is not filed, at the instance of the party who has the right to appeal. Thus having regard to the scheme of Section 351 and 401 of Cr.P.C., this Revision was not maintainable. 3 cri.rev.appln.304-98 3. However, the learned Counsel for the applicant stated that by now the Revision has become infructuous in as much as in the intervening period the applicant has already suffered the sentence. Hence, the Revision is dismissed as infructuous. (A.M. THIPSAY, J.) (B. H. MARLAPALLE, J.)