By the Court.—We have heard Sri Ashutosh, Advocate appearing on behalf of the appellant Nanhey Singh @ Dinesh Singh, challenging the correctness of judgment of acquittal dated 11.10.2006, passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 3, Bijnor in Sessions Trials No. 356 of 2005 and 160 of 2006, by which respondents Kuldip Singh and Nagendra Pal were acquitted of offence under Section 302 IPC, who is neither the informant of the case nor was examined as a witness. He has made a statement in his affidavit that he was the cousin brother of the deceased Jabbar Singh, who was the son of informant Babu Ram, examined as PW-2 in the Court below.

2. The “party interested” or “a victim” could have a locus standi of preferring an appeal and we for that reason, while referring to the provisions of Section 372 Cr.P.C., recall the judgment of the Supreme Court in Baghwant Singh v. Commissioner of Police, Delhi, 1983 AIR 826, as also Janta Dal v. H S Chowdhary and others, AIR 1993 SC 892. There is no doubt in our mind that the appellant is a busy-bee, he is an inter-meddler, who has pecked his nose unnecessarily to waste the Court’s time. This is one aspect of the case as regards