Appeals Against Acquittal Cannot Be Withdrawn Once Admitted: Calcutta High Court

In a significant clarification on appellate procedure, the High Court at Calcutta has ruled that a criminal appeal, once admitted, cannot be withdrawn at the will of the appellant. The bench, comprising Justice Arijit Banerjee and Justice Apurba Sinha Ray, held that the court is duty-bound to dispose of such appeals on their merits, even if the appellant—including a de facto complainant—seeks to opt out of the proceedings.

The Backdrop: A Change of Heart

The matter arose from an appeal filed by one Bijoy Lakshmi Ghosh, who challenged an acquittal order passed by the Additional District and Sessions Judge at Berhampore, Murshidabad, in 2021 regarding charges under Sections 302 /34 of the Indian Penal Code. During the pendency of the appeal, the appellant sought leave to withdraw the case, citing an intent to drop the prosecution. Counsel for the appellant relied on the Gujarat High Court’s decision in Chimanlal J. Gandhi v. Anilbhai R. Bakeri , which suggested that inherent powers could be exercised to grant such requests in the interest of justice.

Conversely, the State argued that legal precedent from the Supreme Court and this High Court has consistently held that once an appeal enters the judicial stream, it must reach its natural conclusion via a merit-based decision, preventing "non-prosecution" by private parties.

Defining Judicial Obligation

The court meticulously examined the distinction (or lack thereof) between the state’s role and that of a private complainant. Despite the procedural amendments in the Code of Criminal Procedure granting victims the right to appeal under Section 372 , the bench noted that this provision does not grant complainants a different status when it comes to withdrawing an appeal.

The Calcutta High Court emphasized that the law requires a thorough examination of evidence and logic, transcending the desires of the litigating parties.

Key Observations

The judgment clarifies the non-negotiable nature of the appellate process:

• "There can be no doubt that a criminal appeal once admitted has to be pursued to its natural conclusion and that the appellate Court must consider the appeal on its merits, whether or not the appellant is desirous of prosecuting the same."
• "The plain language of Sections 385–386 does not contemplate dismissal of the appeal for non-prosecution simpliciter. On the contrary, the Code envisages disposal of the appeal on merits after perusal and scrutiny of the record."
• "As the position of the defacto complainant in withdrawing his/her appeal is not different from that of the State in withdrawing its appeal against judgment of acquittal, we do think that the same principle which was laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court... would apply."

The Verdict and Future Implications

Ultimately, the Calcutta High Court rejected the appellant's prayer for withdrawal. The case underscores a move toward maintaining systemic integrity in criminal justice, ensuring that serious charges resulting in acquittals are not abandoned due to private settlements or shifts in the complainant's resolve once the legal machinery of the High Court has been activated. The court has directed that the appeal be listed for hearing after the preparation of necessary paperwork, affirming that the judiciary’s duty is to scrutinize the trial court’s findings against the evidence on record, regardless of the appellant’s current stance.