ABDUL RAM Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal under Section 378(4) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (in short the 'Code'), Challenge is to the judgment and order dated 12th April, 2001 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, New Delhi in Sessions Case No. 114/00. Though the date was specifically fixed today by order dated 1st August, 2001 at the request of the parties, none appears to represent the appellant. Mr. A.K. Singh, learned Counsel appearing for respondent No. 2 submits that the appeal itself is not maintainable, in view of the clear language of Section 378(4). According to him, the appel lant is not the complainant and therefore the appeal itself is to be dismissed as non-competent.

(2.) Section 378 deals with the appeal in case of acquittal. The said section reads as follows:

(3.) A bare perusal of Sub-section (4) shows that the appeal can be presented by the complainant. Admittedly the case at hand is a Government Report case and the appeal has not been filed by the informant. As the records reveal one Babloo S/o Khalu Ram was the informant. Sub-section (4) of Section 378 makes it clear that only in cases instituted upon complaint the complainant may prefer appeal from the order of acquittal after obtaining leave. As indicated above, the case at hand was a Government Report case. Provisions of Section 378(4) do not permit a complainant to prefer any appeal against the order of acquittal passed in Government Report case. Whenever a case is taken cognizance of by the police, and a Government Report remains a Government Report case.