The nature of the proceeding, if it may result in imprisonment, fine, or forfeiture of property, determines whether it falls under criminal jurisdiction, and an appeal under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent Rules is not maintainable.

ORDER :

(S.K. Mishra, J.)

1. The simple question in this Letters Patent Appeal is whether an intracourt appeal shall lie from a judgment/order passed by learned Single Judge in exercise of criminal jurisdiction. Clause 10 of the Letters Patent Rules of Patna High Court reads as follows: -

“10. Appeal to the High Court from Judges of the Court. – And we do further ordain that an appeal shall lie to the said High Court of Judicature at Patna from the judgment (not being a judgment passed in the exercise of appellate jurisdiction in respect of a decree or order) made in the exercise of appellate jurisdiction by a Court subject to the superintendence of the said High Court, and not being an order made in the exercise of revisional jurisdiction, and not being a sentence or order passed or made in the exercise of the power of superintendence under the provisions of Section 107 of the Government of India Act, or in the exercise of criminal jurisdiction of one Judge of the said High Court or one Judge of any Division Court, pursuant to Section 108 of the Government of India Act, and that notwithstanding anything hereinbefore provided an appeal shall lie to the said High Court from a judgment of one Judge of the said High Court or one Judge of any Division Court, pursuant to Section 108 of the Government of India Act, made on or after the first day of February, One thousand nine hundred and twenty-nine, in the exercise of appellate jurisdiction in respect of a decree or order made in the exercise of appellate jurisdiction by a Court subject to the superintendence of the said High Court, where the Judge who passed the judgment declares that the case is a fit one for appeal; but that the right of appeal from other judgments of Judges of the said High Court or of such Division Court shall be to Us, Our Heirs or Successors in Our or Their Privy Council, as hereinafter provided.”

2. In interpreting the said provision, the Full Bench of Orissa High Court in the case of Sri Kasinath Nayak versus State of Odisha & Others reported in 2015 SCC OnLine Ori 452 has come to the conclusion that a criminal proceeding on the other hand is ordinarily one in which if carried to its conclusion it may result in the imposition of sentences such as death, imprisonment, fine or forfeiture of property. It also includes proceedings in which in the larger interest of the State, orders to prevent apprehended breach of the peace, orders to bind down persons who are danger to the maintenance of peace and order, or orders aimed at preventing vagrancy are contemplated to be passed.

3. In that case, the Full Bench of Orissa High Court was considering the rejection of an application registered as W.P.(Crl.) praying for further investigation of offences involving Sections 498-A, 302, 304-B and 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. The Full Bench of Orissa High Court had taken into consideration the Constitution Bench judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of S.A.L. Narayan Row versus Ishwarlal Bhagwandas reported in AIR 1965 SC 1818, which was later on followed by High Court of Judicature at Gujarat in Sanjeev Rajendrabhai Bhatt versus State of Gujarat reported in 1999 Cr.L.J. 338. The Full Bench of the Orissa High Court with approval quoted the observations made by the Gujarat High Court, which read as under:

“80. In our considered opinion, in the instant case, the proceedings can be said to be criminal proceedings inasmuch as, carried to its conclusion, they may result into imprisonment, fine etc. as observed by the Supreme Court in Narayana Row.

81. From the totality of facts and circumstances, we have no hesitation in holding that the learned single Judge has passed an order in exercise of criminal jurisdiction. At the cost of repetition, we reiterate that we have already stated earlier that the proceedings were of a criminal nature. Whether a criminal Court takes cognizance of an offence or sends a complaint for investigatio