9911796707
|
Home
Issues involved: Interpretation of proviso to Section 372, Cr.P.C. in relation to Section 378(4), Cr.P.C.
Summary: In the matter at hand, the appellant challenged an acquittal order in a Criminal Case under Section 138 of N.I. Act, 1881. The amended proviso to Section 372, Cr.P.C. allows victims to appeal against acquittal orders, with such appeals to be heard by the Sessions Court. While Section 378(4) of Cr.P.C. grants the High Court jurisdiction over appeals against acquittals, the proviso to Section 372 confers this jurisdiction on the Sessions Court. The appellant should have first approached the Sessions Court before coming to the High Court, unless exceptional grounds exist. The trend of directly filing appeals before the High Court is discouraged. The amended proviso to Section 372 of Cr.P.C. was not considered in previous judgments, including one by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and another by the Rajasthan High Court. A judgment by Hon'ble Mr. Justice Dalip Singh of the Rajasthan High Court supports the view that appeals against magistrate acquittals should be directed to the Sessions Court. Consequently, the petition for leave to appeal is returned to the petitioner to be presented before the Sessions Judge, Bhilwara. Any delay caused by this process will not affect the appellant under the law of limitation. The petition for leave to appeal is disposed of accordingly.
|
