Document Fragment View
Fragment Information
Showing contexts for: section 372 of code of criminal procedure in Rekha Devi vs The State Of Bihar on 4 April, 2025Matching Fragments
passed by the District and Sessions Judge, Bagalkot (Karnataka) in SC No. 49 of 2010."
(Emphasis Supplied)
18. However, as per the minority view in Mallikarjun Kodagali case (supra), the right of the victim to file appeal under Proviso to Section 372 Cr.PC cannot be read in isolation. It must be read with Section 378(3) and Section 378(4) of Cr.PC which provide for provision for grant of Leave or Special Leave of the High Court before filing appeal before it. The right of the victim must be balanced with the right of the accused. The presumption of innocence of the accused gets strengthened when the person is acquitted. Hence, High Court should look into the matter and first decide as to whether there are sufficient reasons to grant leave to file an appeal or not. There is no reason why such scrutiny should not be done in appeal filed by the victim. The victim cannot be placed on a higher pedestal than the State or the complaint.
(Emphasis Supplied)
20. Hence, after Joseph Stephen case (supra) and Mallikarjun Kodagali case (supra), it is settled that the right of the victim to prefer an appeal under the Proviso to Section 372 Cr.PC is absolute. The victim is not required to obtain any Leave or Special Leave from High Court to file appeal to it under the Proviso of Section 372 Cr.PC. However, in complaint case, the complainant, not being a victim, is required to obtain Special Leave as required under Section 378(4) Cr.PC from the High Court to file Appeal before it. It is apparent from the last line of Para 13.1 of Joseph Stephen case (supra). Moreover, the victims of both complaint case and police case are equally entitled to file appeal under the Proviso to Section 372 Cr.PC to High Court without any Leave or Special Leave as required under Sections 378(3) and 378(4) Cr.PC because the Proviso to Patna High Court CR. REV. No.105 of 2019 dt.04-04-2025 Section 372 Cr.PC does not discriminate between the victim of a police case or that of a complaint case.
21. There is also no substance in the submission of learned Amicus Curiae that no Criminal Appeal can lie against the judgment of an Appellate Court. Here, it becomes relevant to point out that the remedy of Criminal Appeal is the creature of the statute and unless the same is provided either in the Code of Criminal Procedure or in any other law for the time being in force, no appeal is maintainable as is evident from Section 372 Cr.PC and it is also true that as per Section 393 Cr.PC, there is generally finality of the judgments and orders passed in Criminal Appeals. But even Section 393 Cr.PC provides for some exceptions to the general rule by making general provision of Section 393 Cr.PC subject to provisions of Sections 377, 378 and 384 Cr.PC whereunder appeal has been provided to High Court even against Appellate judgments. Even under the Proviso to Section 372 Cr.PC, there is no stipulation at all that such appeal could be filed by the victims only against Trial Court judgments.
27. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances and the binding judicial precedents, the victim-petitioner had Patna High Court CR. REV. No.105 of 2019 dt.04-04-2025 remedy to file Criminal Appeal to this Court under the Proviso to Section 372 Cr.PC without any Leave or Special Leave. However, the victim-petitioner has preferred the present Criminal Revision. But in view of the availability of the remedy of Criminal Appeal to the victim-petitioner, the present Criminal Revision is hit by Section 401(4) Cr.PC. However, Sub-Section 5 of Section 401 Cr.PC enables this Court to convert the Criminal Revision into Criminal Appeal and treat the same accordingly and to decide it on merit.