9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
- Maintainability of a joint appeal by the State against the acquittal of several accused persons tried jointly. Analysis: The judgment in question involves the determination of whether the State can prefer one appeal against the acquittal of multiple accused persons tried jointly. The High Court held that a joint appeal by the State against the acquittal of all accused persons is not maintainable under the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC). The High Court based its decision on various sections of the CrPC, particularly Section 419, which was interpreted to contain a bar against a joint appeal. The High Court also discussed the binding nature of previous decisions and the importance of judicial decorum in following established legal principles. The Supreme Court referred to previous decisions, including a Full Bench decision of the Gujarat High Court, which held that a joint appeal by several persons convicted at a joint trial is competent. The Supreme Court reasoned that if an appeal by convicted individuals is permissible, it is difficult to negate the maintainability of one appeal by the State against the acquittal of several accused persons tried jointly. The Court highlighted that the relevant rule in the Bombay High Court Appellate Side Rules allows for joint appeals by persons affected by the same judgment, which supports the principle of a joint appeal by the State. Furthermore, the Supreme Court analyzed various sections of the CrPC, such as Sections 417, 419, 258, 410, and 423, to argue that there is no legal prohibition against a joint appeal by the State against multiple acquitted accused persons. The Court emphasized that the CrPC does not explicitly bar such appeals and that a liberal approach should be adopted to ensure that appeals are heard on their merits in the interest of justice. Ultimately, the Supreme Court allowed the appeal, set aside the High Court's order, and remitted the case back to the High Court for a decision on the appeal's merits.
|
