' FAZAL-E-MIRAN CHAUJIAN, J.--- This criminal miscellaneous is directed against the judgment, dated 31-3-2006 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Ridge, lvlandi Bahauddin, whereby he accepted the revision petition of respondent/complainant and enhanced the amount of Daman of Rs,5,000 to Rs,15,000 and maintained conviction under section 337-F(iv) and F(vi), P.P.C. And, sentenced the petitioner for 1-1/2 years R.I. Benefit of section 382-B, Cr.P.C. Was also granted to them.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the sentence awarded to the respondents is not sufficient, therefore, in the interest of justice Maximum punishment as provided under the law may be awarded to the respondents as the petitioner was attacked by them when he was alone and was injured in a merciless manner.
3. The learned counsel for the respondents has seriously opposed the prayer made by the learned counsel for the appellant.
4. Heard. Record perused.
5. The petitioners filed the revision petition before the learned Additional Sessions Judge for enhancement of the sentence, which was dismissed. This is second criminal miscellaneous filed under section 561-A, Cr.P.C. Which is not maintainable. High Court no doubt has got inherent power to modify the sentence awarded to accused in exercise of its powers under section 561-A, Cr.P.C.
But it has no power to enhance the sentence. This Court cannot enhance the sentence in view of law laid down in cases reported as Haji Sabir and 9 others v. The State 2001 PCr.LJ 754.
6. The inherent powers are not supposed to be exercised to override express provisions of law.
Section 561-A, Cr.P.C. Cannot be invoked to and added where there are express provision dealing with a particular subject or can be used to defeat the express provisions of Legislature. Reference is made to Ashiq Hussain Thahim v. The State and 2 others 1999 M LD 535.
' In view of the above, this petition having no merit is dismissed.