The right to appeal granted to victims is prospective and applies only to judgments issued on or after December 31, 2009; earlier judgments can only be challenged through revisions.

JUDGMENT

Umesh Chandra Sharma, J.

Heard Sri Rajiv Lochan Shukla, learned counsel for the revisionist, Sri Mithilesh Kumar, learned AGA for the State, Sri A. Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the opposite party nos.2 to 8 and perused the record.

2. At present, before this Court, the application dated 04.12.2019 moved on behalf of the revisionist to convert the present revision into criminal appeal is pending for disposal with an affidavit against which the accused persons have strong objection that at the time of institution of this revision and when cause of action arises to the informant, there was no provision to prefer an appeal against an order of acquittal passed by the Sessions Judge.

3. In brief, facts of the case are that the Sessions Judge, Hamirpur acquitted all the accused persons under the charges under Sections 148, 352, 302 read with Section 149 IPC by the judgment and order dated 07.03.1996. Being aggrieved, the informant preferred this criminal revision under Section 397 /401 CrPC on 15.04.1996. During the pendency of the instant criminal revision, learned counsel for the revisionist has moved an application dated 04.12.2019 to convert this revision into criminal appeal under Section 372 CrPC with the allegations that the deponent Smt. Mamta Shukla has been advised to state that by virtue of amendment in the Code of Criminal Procedure, now the victim has right to prefer a criminal appeal against the order of acquittal under Section 372 CrPC.

4. The deponent had preferred a criminal revision in the year 1996 for the remedy as existed at that relevant point of time. However, now due to legislative changes which is beneficiary in nature, a better right to file a criminal appeal is available to the deponent which she prays and she may be allowed to convert the revision into an appeal otherwise the revisionist shall suffer irreparable loss and injury. Therefore, this Court may graciously be pleased to allow the application and convert this criminal revision into criminal appeal as maintainable on behalf of the victim under Section 372 CrPC otherwise the applicant shall suffer irreparable loss and injury.

5. In Chapter XXX of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the provisions regarding the criminal revision has been mentioned in Sections 395 to 405 CrPC. The relevant sections for the purpose of the matter are Sections 397 and 401 CrPC which are as under:-

"397. Calling for records to exercise powers of revision.-(1) The High Court or any Sessions Judge may call for and examine the record of any proceeding before any inferior Criminal Court situate within its or his local jurisdiction for the purpose of satisfying itself or himself; to the correctness, legality or propriety of any finding, sentence or order, recorded or passed, and as to the regularity of any proceedings of such inferior Court, and may, when calling, for such record, direct that the execution of any sentence or order be suspended, and if the accused is in confinement that he be released on bail or on his own bond pending the examination of the record.

Explanation.-All Magistrates, whether Executive or Judicial, and whether exercising original or appellate jurisdiction, shall be deemed to be inferior to the Sessions Judge for the purposes of this sub-section and of section 398.

(2) The powers of revision conferred by sub-section (1) shall not be exercised in relation to any interlocutory order pas