Victims have a right to appeal against acquittals under Section 372 of the Cr.P.C., clarifying the distinction between 'victim' and 'complainant' for appeal purposes.

ORDER :

1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual/Physical Mode).

2. Heard the learned counsel for the Petitioner as well as learned counsel for the State. Perused the application as well as the prayer made therein.

3. By filing the present petition under Section 378(4) of the Cr.P.C. read with Section 419(4) of BNSS, 2023, the Petitioner, who happens to be the Informant in the F.I.R. initially lodged before Tamando Police Station and, accordingly, Tamando P.S. Case No.257 of 2024 came to existence, has approached this Court seeking leave to challenge the judgment of acquittal dated 30.07.2025 passed by the learned J.M.F.C. (L.R. & LTV), Bhubaneswar in C.T. Case No.596 of 2024/T.R. No.06 of 2025.

4. Learned counsel for the Petitioner, at the outset, contended that in terms of provision contained in Section 378(4) of Cr.P.C., the Petitioner, who happens to be a complainant, has a right to approach this Court seeking leave to prefer an appeal before this Court. He further submitted that the judgment of acquittal at Annexure-1 is an erroneous judgment and the same has been passed without taking into consideration the material evidence on record. As such, the complainant in the C.T. Case has approached this Court by filing this petition under Section 378(4) of Cr.P.C. seeking leave to prefer an appeal before this Court.

5. Learned counsel for the State, on the other hand, contended that the Petitioner was the Informant at whose instance an F.I.R. was lodged and, accordingly, Tamando P.S. Case No.257 of 2024 was registered for commission of an offence under Sections 420/294/506/34 of the I.P.C. In the aforesaid factual backdrop, learned counsel for the State contended that the right to appeal of the Petitioner has been protected in the proviso to Section 372 of Cr.P.C., under Chapter-XXIX thereof. The proviso to Section 372 of Cr.P.C. provides a right to the victim to prefer an appeal against an order acquittal passed by the trial court and the appeal shall be presented before the court to which an appeal would have lied against the order of conviction. In such view of the matter, learned counsel for the State contended that the right of the Petitioner to prefer an appeal before the appellant court is preserved and protected by the proviso under Section 372 of Cr.P.C. In such view of the matter, learned counsel for the State submitted that the present application is misconceived and, accordingly, the same should be dismissed as devoid of merit.

6. Heard the learned counsels appearing for the respective parties and on careful examination of the materials on record as well as the background facts, this Court observes that the question that is required to be determined in the present CRLLP is as to whether the Petitioner can file an appeal under the proviso to Section 372 of Cr.P.C. or under Section 378(4) of Cr.P.C. In the aforesaid context, it would be relevant to refer to both the provisions contained in Code of Criminal Procedure. Section 372 of Cr.P.C. reads as thus :-

“372. No appeal to lie unless otherwise provided.—No appeal shall lie from any judgment or order of a Criminal Court except as provided for by this Code or by any other law for the time being in force:

Provided that the victim shall have a right to prefer an appeal against any order passed by the Court acquitting the accused or convicting for a lesser offence or imposing inadequate compensation, and such appeal shall lie to the Court to which an appeal ordinarily lies against the order of conviction of