SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2001 Supreme(Del) 13

V.S.AGGARWAL, B.A.KHAN
STATE OF DELHI – Appellant
Versus
SUBHASH CHAND – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
ASHA TIVARI, MUKTA GUPTA

KHAN

( 1 ) THIS, appeal is said to be delayed by 136 days and appellant had not even chosen to seek condonation. Confronted with this L/c for appellant sought to justify the delay by falling back upon provisions of Section 378 (5) Code of Criminal Procedure which prescribed six months limitation period for filing acquittal appeal by a public servant complainant in cases instituted upon a complaint. This provision, according to her, provided six months to appellant to file the present appeal which had also emanated from a complaint and was thus filed within time. L/c for respondents, however, repelled this to claim that Acquittal Appeal of State was to be filed within 90 days from the date of acquittal order under A. 114 of the limitation Act. She sought support for this from Supreme court Judgement in "state Vs. Dharampal (JT 2001 (9) SC 136 ).

( 2 ) THE relevant provision reads thus :-

"378 (4) if such an order of acquittal is passed in any case instituted upon complaint and the High Court, on an application made to it by the complainant in this behalf, grants special leave to appeal from the order of acquittal, the complainant may present such an appeal to the High court.

(5) No ap







Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top