SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR

BEFORE

HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR PALIWAL

ON THE 24th OF FEBRUARY, 2022

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.4120/2020

Between:-

MADHUKAR PATLE S/O SHRI UKKAN LAL

PATLE , AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, OCCUPATION:

AGRICULTURIST VILLAGE NAVEGOWN P.S.

RAMPAYELI

DISTT.

BALAGHAT

(MADHYA

PRADESH)

.....APPELLANT

(BY SHRI ASHOK AGRAWAL, ADVOCATE)

AND

1.

THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THR. P.S.

RAMPAYELI BALAGHAT (MADHYA PRADESH)

2.

DHANENDRA

LILHARE

S/O

GHOOSALAL

LILHARE

,

AGED

ABOUT

40

YEARS, R/O

VILLAGE

BHOORGARH

P.S.KHERLANJI

(MADHYA PRADESH)

3.

JAGANNATH

LILHARE

S/O

GHOOSALAL

LILHARE

,

AGED

ABOUT

52

YEARS, R/O

VILLAGE

BHOORGARH

P.S.KHERLANJI

(MADHYA PRADESH)

4.

RETRAM LILHARE S/O GHOOSALAL LILHARE ,

AGED

ABOUT

37

YEARS, R/O

VILLAGE

BHOORGARH

P.S.KHERLANJI

(MADHYA

PRADESH)

5.

RAJESH LILHARE S/O JAGANNATH LILHARE ,

AGED

ABOUT

29

YEARS, R/O

VILLAGE

BHOORGARH

P.S.KHERLANJI

(MADHYA

PRADESH)

.....RESPONDENTS

(RESPONDENT NO.1 BY SHRI HARISH SHUKLA, PANEL LAWYER)

MISC. CRIMINAL CASE NO. 32020 of 2020

Between:-

1

Signed by: BIJU BABY

Signing time:

9/21/2022 6:18:20 PM

Signature Not Verified

THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THR. POLICE

CHOUKI P.S. POLICE CHOUKI KHAIRLANJI P.S.

RAMPAYLI

DIST.

BALAGHAT

(MADHYA

PRADESH)

.....APPELLANT

(BY SHRI HARISH SHUKLA, PANEL LAWYER)

AND

1.

DHANENDRA LILHARE S/O SHRI DHUSALAL

LILHARE , AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, VILL.

BHOURGARH

THANA

KHAIRLANJI

DIST.

BALAGHAT (MADHYA PRADESH)

2.

JAGANNATH LILHARE S/O DHUSALAL LILHARE

,

AGED

ABOUT

52

YEARS, VILLAGE

BHOURGARH THANA KHAIRLANJI (MADHYA

PRADESH)

3.

RATIRAM LILHARE S/O DHUSALAL LILHARE ,

AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS, VILLAGE BHOURGARH

THANA KHAIRLANJI (MADHYA PRADESH)

4.

RAJESH LILHARE S/O JAGANNATH LILHARE ,

AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS, VILLAGE BHOURGARH

THANA KHAIRLANJI (MADHYA PRADESH)

.....RESPONDENTS

(NONE FOR THE RESPONDENTS )

T h e appeal

and

M.Cr.C.

coming

on

for

admission

and

I.A.No.11165/2020, respectively, this day, the court passed the following:

Advocates:
Ashok Agrawal,Advocate General

1. As the both aforesaid Criminal Appeal No.4120/2020 and

M.Cr.C.No.32020/2020 arise of the same impugned judgment and order of

acquittal dated 04.12.2019 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate First Class,

Varaseoni District- Balaghat whereby learned JMFC has acquitted the

respondents for the offence punishable under Sections 294, 323, 325, 506-II of

IPC, this order shall govern the disposal of both the case.

2. Heard on I.A.No. 11165/2020 (M.Cr.C.No.32020/2020), an

2

application for condonation of delay. This appeal has been filed with a delay of

12 days.

3. Having regard to the order dated 23.03.2020 passed in Suo-Motu Writ

Petition (Civil) No.(s).3/2020 in recognizance for extension of limitation by the

Hon'ble Apex Court, the delay caused in filing the appeal is ignored.

I.A.No.11165/2020 is disposed of accordingly.

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 such Court.

4. The language of the provisio to Section 372 of the Cr.P.C. is quite

clear. It is clear that there is no provision for any appeal to the High Court

against the orders/judgments of conviction and acquittal passed by the

Magistrate in a case lodged or registered on the basis of an FIR. The appeal

arising out of original judgments/orders of acquittal or of conviction for lesser

offence or imposing inadequate compensation passed by the Magistrate shall lie

to the Court of Session in view of the proviso to Section 372 of the Cr.P.C..

As per Section 374(3), any person convicted on a trial held by a Metropolitan

Magistrate or Assistant Sessions Judge or Magistrate of the First Class, or of

the Second Class or sentenced under Section 325, or in respect of whom an

order has been made or a sentence has been passed under Section 360 by any

Magistrate, the appeal lies to the Court of Session.

3

5. The provisions of Section 378(1&2) Cr.P.C. are unambiguous and no

leave to appeal can be granted to State Government to file an appeal before the

High Court against an order of acquittal passed by Magistrate in a cognizable

and non-bailable offence. Sections 378(1&2) read as under :

378. Appeal in case of acquittal.

(1) Save as otherwise provided in sub- section (2) and subject to the provisions of sub-

sections (3) and (5)-

(a) the District Magistrate may, in any case, direct the Public Prosecutor to present an

appeal to the Court of Session from an order of acquittal passed by a Magistrate in

respect of a cognizable and non-bailable offence;

(b) the State Government may, in any case, direct the Public Prosecutor to present an

appeal to the High Court from an original or appellate order of an acquittal passed by

any Court other than a High Court [not being an order under clause (a)] or an order

of acquittal passed by the Court of Session in revision].

(2) If such an order of acquittal is passed in any case in which the offence has been

investigated by the Delhi Special Police Establishment constituted under the Delhi

Special Police Establishment Act, 1946 (25 o f 1946 ), or by any other agency

empowered to make investigation into an offence under any Central Act other than

this Code, the Central Government may, subject to the provisions of sub- section (3)

also direct the Public Prosecutor to present an appeal-

(a) to the Court of Session, from an order of acquittal passed by a Magistrate in

respect of a cognizable and non-bailable offence;

(b) to the High Court from an original or appellate order of an acquittal passed by

any Court other than a High Court [not being an order under clause (a)] or an order

of acquittal passed by the Court of Session in revision].

6.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top