Case Note & Summary
The case pertains to a review petition filed by the complainant, Pottayil Radha, against an order of the Supreme Court in Criminal Appeal No.853 of 2020. The High Court had earlier reduced the substantive sentence of the accused to six months, a view that was not challenged by the prosecution or the complainant. In the Supreme Court, the accused was directed to deposit Rs.2,50,000/- to compensate the complainant. Despite being served, the complainant did not appear. The complainant then sought review of the order, arguing that the reduction of sentence was erroneous. The Supreme Court examined the grounds raised in the review petition and found no error apparent on the face of the record to justify interference. Consequently, the review petition was dismissed. The Court emphasized that the reduction of sentence was not challenged by the prosecution or the complainant, and the compensation amount was directed to be paid to the complainant.
Headnote
A) Criminal Procedure - Review Petition - Error Apparent - The Supreme Court held that no error apparent on the face of the record was made out to justify review of the order reducing substantive sentence to six months and directing compensation of Rs.2,50,000/- to the complainant. The Court noted that the complainant had not appeared despite service, and the reduction was not challenged by the prosecution or complainant. (Paras 1-2)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the review petition disclosed any error apparent on the face of the record to justify interference with the order reducing the substantive sentence to six months and directing payment of Rs.2,50,000/- as compensation.
Final Decision
The Supreme Court dismissed the review petition, finding no error apparent on the face of the record.
Law Points
- Review petition
- error apparent on face of record
- compensation to complainant
- reduction of sentence
