Appellate Powers Of Supreme Court In Criminal Cases
1. Constitutional and Statutory Basis
The Supreme Court of India exercises its appellate jurisdiction in criminal cases mainly under:
Article 132: Appeal in case of conviction by High Courts in any criminal proceeding involving a substantial question of law.
Article 133: Appellate jurisdiction in civil cases.
Article 134: Appeals in criminal cases from High Courts.
Section 375 CrPC: Appeals from High Court decisions in criminal matters.
Section 379 CrPC: Appeals from convictions by Sessions Courts to High Courts, and subsequently to the Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court’s criminal appellate powers are extraordinary and generally discretionary (except in certain cases where appeal is a matter of right).
2. Types of Appeals in Criminal Cases
Appeal as of Right: Usually where High Court certifies or in death penalty cases.
Special Leave to Appeal (SLA): Under Article 136, the Supreme Court can grant special leave against any judgment/order in criminal matters.
Appeals on substantial questions of law arising from High Court decisions.
3. Scope of Appellate Powers
Re-examination of facts and evidence.
Correction of errors of law or fact.
Interference with acquittal or conviction if there is miscarriage of justice.
Can confirm, reverse, modify, or order retrial.
4. Limitations
Supreme Court is not a first appellate authority but a court of final resort.
Does not routinely interfere with factual findings unless manifest error or gross miscarriage of justice.
Appeals can be rejected if frivolous or without merit.
Landmark Case Law on Appellate Powers in Criminal Cases
1. State of Uttar Pradesh v. Rajesh Gautam (2003)
Issue: Scope of appellate power regarding reappraisal of evidence by the Supreme Court.
Holding:
The Supreme Court held that while it can reappraise evidence, it should not interfere with the findings of fact by trial courts unless there is a gross miscarriage of justice.
Significance:
Emphasized judicial restraint in criminal appeals, limiting interference to exceptional cases.
2. Bachan Singh v. State of Punjab (1980)
Issue: Appeal in death penalty cases.
Holding:
The Supreme Court ruled that all death penalty cases should be automatically reviewed or appealed before the Supreme Court, ensuring safeguards in capital punishment.
Significance:
Established mandatory appellate review in death penalty cases.
3. Kehar Singh v. Union of India (1988)
Issue: Discretionary powers of Supreme Court in granting Special Leave to Appeal in criminal matters.
Holding:
The Court observed that granting leave under Article 136 is discretionary and can be refused unless there is a substantial question of law or miscarriage of justice.
Significance:
Clarified the threshold for Supreme Court interference in criminal appeals.
4. Noor Aga v. State of Punjab (1959)
Issue: Reversing acquittal on appeal.
Holding:
The Court held that the Supreme Court has the power to reverse an acquittal if the lower courts misread evidence or misapplied law.
Significance:
Confirmed that the Supreme Court can interfere in acquittal to prevent miscarriage of justice.
5. State of Rajasthan v. Kashi Ram (2006)
Issue: Interference with conviction based on appreciation of evidence.
Holding:
The Court ruled that it will interfere if the conviction is based on unreliable or insufficient evidence.
Significance:
Reiterated the role of the Supreme Court in correcting wrongful convictions.
6. Surendra Mishra v. State of Uttar Pradesh (2013)
Issue: Delay in filing appeals and its effect on appellate jurisdiction.
Holding:
The Court held that delay in filing appeal must be explained satisfactorily; otherwise, the appeal may be dismissed.
Significance:
Highlighted procedural safeguards and the importance of timely filing of appeals.
Summary Table of Principles
| Case | Principle Established | Impact |
|---|---|---|
| Rajesh Gautam (2003) | Supreme Court should exercise restraint in reappraising evidence | Limits interference to gross miscarriage cases |
| Bachan Singh (1980) | Mandatory appeal in death penalty cases | Protection of capital punishment rights |
| Kehar Singh (1988) | Special Leave is discretionary | High threshold for Supreme Court intervention |
| Noor Aga (1959) | Power to reverse acquittals | Prevents miscarriage of justice |
| State v. Kashi Ram (2006) | Interference if conviction is based on unreliable evidence | Protects against wrongful conviction |
| Surendra Mishra (2013) | Delay in filing appeals must be justified | Enforces procedural discipline |
Conclusion
The Supreme Court’s appellate powers in criminal cases are broad but exercised with caution. It serves as the final guardian of justice by correcting errors of law and preventing miscarriage of justice, especially in serious cases like capital punishment. However, it respects the factual findings of trial courts and intervenes only when necessary.
RELATED Blog
0 comments