Punjab-Haryana High Court
Swaran Singh vs Swaran Singh And Others on 15 September, 2022
CRM-28233-2021 in/and CRM-A-47-2021 --1--
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
CRM-28233-2021 in/and CRM-A-47-2021
Swaran Singh vs. Swaran Singh and others
Present: Mr. J.S. Warring, Advocate for the applicant.
Mr. Kamal Narula, Advocate for respondents No.1 to 3.
Mr. Jashandeep Singh, AAG, Punjab.
***
CRM-28233-2021 Aggrieved by the acquittal of the accused and dismissal of his complaint, the complainant has come up before this Court by filing the application for granting leave to appeal along with application for condoning the delay of 468 days in filing the appeal.
Perusal of the delay application reveals that the grounds for delay were that the complainant had filed an petition before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bathinda, which was dismissed on merits vide order dated 24.05.2019 (Annexure A-1).
The reference to Section 378(4) CrPC would reveal that against the order of acquittal in complaint, the remedy was to file a leave to appeal before this Court. Section 372(2) CrPC creates a bar that no appeal shall lie otherwise provided under CrPC. Thus, once an appeal has been specifically be provided under Section 378(4) CrPC, as such , the Sessions Court had no jurisdiction to entertain and decide the revision on merits.
Given above, the delay of 468 days in filing the appeal, is condoned. CRM-A-47-2021 Leave to appeal is granted.
Main appeal Admit.
List for final hearing on its own turn as per its queue. It is clarified that there is no need for the respondents to furnish personal bonds or surety bonds, however in case of reversal of acquittal, they are directed to comply with the order of this Court. It is futher clarified that mere pendency of the present appeal shall not be construed against the respondents whatsoever in any manner.
(ANOOP CHITKARA) JUDGE Reserved on: 31.08.2022 Pronounced on : 15.09.2022 anju rani 1 of 1 ::: Downloaded on - 17-09-2022 23:41:10 :::