Power of High Court to confirm sentence or annul conviction
Section 368 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 deals with power of High Court to confirm sentence or annul conviction. In any case submitted under section 366, the High Court- (a) may confirm the sentence, or pass any other sentence warranted by law, or (b) may annul the conviction, and convict the accused of any offence of which the Court of Session might have convicted him, or order a new trial on the same or an a The Act came into force on 01 Apr 1974. Repealed by section 531 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (46 of 2023) with effect from 1 July 2024, but conduct before that date is still charged, tried and appealed under it.
In any case submitted under section 366, the High Court-
(a) may confirm the sentence, or pass any other sentence warranted by law, or
(b) may annul the conviction, and convict the accused of any offence of which the Court of Session might have convicted him, or order a new trial on the same or an amended charge, or
(c) may acquit the accused person:
Provided that no order of confirmation shall be made under this section until the period allowed for preferring an appeal has expired, or, if an appeal is presented within such period, until such appeal is disposed of.
Section 368, The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Act 2 of 1974).
Now in the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita
BNSS 409 Power of High Court to confirm sentence or annul conviction Text carried over almost unchanged 100%
Measured by comparing the text of the two provisions, not taken from an official correspondence table — there is no machine-readable one. See both texts side by side before relying on it.
Both regimes are live. The repealed enactment still governs what happened while it was in force. We never redirect one to the other.
Cross-references
Extracted from the operative text of the enactments themselves. Every destination below exists in our corpus.
This section refers to
Related judgements & precedents
These are some judgments that construed this section, and hold precedence value. They hold authority on how to read, interpret and use this section.
-
Rajlaxmi Pharmaceuticals vs State by the Asst Drugs Controller
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
Before taking cognizance of criminal offences, a Magistrate must carefully consider and advert to the date of commission of the alleged offence and the date of presentation of the complaint to determine whether the prosecution is barred by the applicable limitation period. The Magistrate cannot issue summons to multiple accused without individually considering the limitation period applicable to the specific offences alleged against each accused. When a complaint is filed years after the alleged commission of offence, the Magistrate must examine whether the limitation period prescribed under the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 and the Criminal Procedure Code has been exceeded before proceeding with the case.
On this section: Limitation period for criminal prosecution; petitioners argued that the complaint was barred by time under this section
The holding above is the ratio decidendi as extracted from the judgment by eCourts India, reproduced unaltered — it is a rendering of the court's reasoning, not a substitute for its words. Read the order itself before relying on it.
Judgments citing this section
These may be obiter dicta or a precedent, for you to study. These are the judgments where this section is quoted.
-
… commission of offence of murder cannot be held to be brutal or inhuman and consequently the death sentence was liable to be altered as one for life for the offence under Section 302 IPC. The Division Bench of the High Court did not bother to exercise its jurisdiction vested in it under Section 366(1) CrPC read with Sections 368 to 370 and 392 CrPC in letter and spirit and thereby, in our opinion, shirked its responsibility while deciding the reference in the manner it ought to have been otherwise decided under the Code of Criminal Procedure. We feel that less said is better while commenting upon the cursory manner in which the judgment …
Questions about Section 368
What have the courts held on Section 368 of the Code of Criminal Procedure?
Rajlaxmi Pharmaceuticals vs State by the Asst Drugs Controller (13 Jan 2009) is the leading judgment on this section among those set out below: Limitation period for criminal prosecution; petitioners argued that the complaint was barred by time under this section.
How do I find court cases under Section 368 of the Code of Criminal Procedure?
In judgments and charge sheets this section is written several ways, and each form finds a different set of orders. These search the full text of every order eCourtsIndia holds, best matches first: CRPC 368, section 368 CRPC, section 368 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Each opens the full list of orders on eCourtsIndia, where it can be narrowed by court, year and outcome. 1 reported judgment on this section is set out on this page, beginning with Rajlaxmi Pharmaceuticals vs State by the Asst Drugs Controller (13 Jan 2009).
What should I read with Section 368 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, and has it changed?
Its own text turns on section 366 (Sentence of death to be submitted by Court of session forconfirmation), so none of them can safely be read on its own. For anything done on or after 1 July 2024 the provision to read is BNSS 409 (Power of High Court to confirm sentence or annul conviction), which replaced it; conduct before that date is still charged, tried and appealed under this section.
When did Section 368 of the Code of Criminal Procedure come into force?
Section 368 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, cited as CRPC 368, came into force on 01 Apr 1974, having been enacted on 25 Jan 1974. It is no longer in force.
Other sections of this Act
- 320. Compounding of offences1554 words
- 167. Procedure when investigation cannot be completed in twenty four hours1005 words
- 220. Trial for more than one offence962 words
- 360. Order to release on probation of good conduct or after admonition804 words
- 2. Definitions799 words
- 198. Prosecution for offences against marriage774 words
Source and method. Compiled from the enactments of Parliament and of the State legislatures as published on India Code, and republished together with commentary and other original matter under section 52(1)(q)(ii) of the Copyright Act, 1957. Structured, cross-referenced and maintained by eCourtsIndia. Recovered from the consolidated text published by India Code (item 330a1099-77ad-4a2e-b22a-769b33398f9e). This page is not a substitute for legal advice.