
“IMPROPER EXERCISE OF REVISIONARY POWERS AND IRREGULAR PLEA TAKING”
Judgment delivered by the Court of Appeal on 25th of March, 2026 The respondent, a foreign national, pleaded guilty in the Subordinate Court to making a false statement to an immigration officer and engaging in business without a permit. He was fined on both counts, and the court further ordered forfeiture of USD 21,330. Dissatisfied, he appealed to the High Court against the forfeiture order, but the High Court invoked its revisionary jurisdiction and set aside the forfeiture on grounds not raised by the parties. On appeal by the state, the Court of Appeal found that the High Court erred in law by exercising revisionary powers in a matter properly before it on appeal. Under Section 338(3) of the Criminal Procedure Code, the High Court is prohibited from exercising revisionary jurisdiction where a convicted person has already appealed, unless the appeal is withdrawn. By introducing and determining an issue outside the grounds of appeal without hearing the parties, the High








