In these cases, an important issue as to the remedy available for an aggrieved to challenge the order of acquittal of the accused in a case instituted on a private complaint, has come up for consideration.

2. Some of the parties, in these cases, contend that the remedy for the aggrieved is only to seek leave to appeal before this Court under Section 378(4) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, whereas the counter argument is that the aggrieved has the right of appeal as per proviso to Section 372 of the Code of Criminal Procedure which was introduced by the Amendment Act, 5/09, with effect from 31.12.2009.

3. It is quite interesting to note that innumerable petitions seeking leave are filed before this Court under Section 378(4) of the Code of Criminal Procedure and equally, appeals are also filed under the proviso to Section 372 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Among the Sessions Judges in this State, there appears to be no uniformity inasmuch as some Sessions Judges entertain appeals against acquittals of the accused, in private complaint cases under proviso to Section 372 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and some do not. Because of this anomalous situation, I have ventured to examine the said question in depth.

4. Considering the importance and the complexity of the issue, I issued notice to all the Bar Associations also so as to afford an opportunity to the Bar to make their submissions. All the Bar Associations responded positively and the respective counsel for each Bar Association made elaborate submissions. I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties also in these matters. They have taken much pains to bring to my notice various Judgments rendered by different High Courts, including the Judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court about which I would make reference at the appropriate stages of this order.

5. Since the issue under consideration is all about the rights of victims, let us, at the first, have a glance through the development and recognition of the rights of victims in our criminal justice delivery system. During the Pre-Constitutional era, a victim of a crime was a “Nobody” in the criminal justice delivery system in this country. Though the Constitution guarantees certain Fundamental Rights which are very fundamental to the sustenance of the human dignity and equality, in the years that followed the Constitution, there was no significant change in the system to recognize the rights of the victims in the criminal justice delivery system. After the crime is committed, the moment the victim gives information to the police and the case is registered under Section 154 Cr.PC, he goes into oblivion and he is almost forgotten. During the course of investigation, he has not been given any vital role to play except to make a true statement under Section 161 Cr.PC. Even the arrest of the accused and the further progress made in the case are not informed to the victim. When the question of bail is considered by the Courts, there is no express provision in the Code providing an opportunity for the victim to oppose the grant of bail. Statutorily, there is no express provision to inform the result of the investigation to the victim. At all the subsequent stages also, he has no role to play except to depose in the Court as a witness at the mercy of the police and the prosecutor. Statutorily, the right given to him is to engage a private pleader to assist the prosecutor and submit a written argument before the trial Court, that too, with the permission of the Court. The day of judgment is also not informed. The poor victim, at times, comes to know about the fate of the case only from the newspaper reports. Even after acquittal, prior to the introduction of the proviso to Section 372 of Cr.P.C., the victim had no right of appeal against the acquittal and against the inadequacy of punishment. In short, he was/is almost kept in dark.

6. In our system, of course, the trial relating to a crime cannot be equated to a