KANABHAI Vs. NARENDRASINH BANESINH CHUDASAMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal was notified for admission hearing on 6/6/2023. Mr. Nayan D. Parekh learned advocate on record for the appellant under the instruction had sought permission of this Court to withdraw the present appeal with further prayer to prefer an appeal before the learned District Judge. The request was made by learned advocate for the appellant to treat the interregnum period in pursuing the present appeal to be looked into by the learned District Judge in view of Sec. 14 of the Limitation Act.

(2.) At the stage of leave to appeal under Sec. 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor had appeared on behalf of the respondent-State and had relied upon the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Joseph Stephen & Ors. V/s. Santhanasamy & Ors. reported in 2022 AIR SCC 670 and had submitted that in view of amendment brought in Sec. 372 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, more particularly, the insertion of proviso to Sec. 372 of the Code, the original-complainant or even the victim, as the case me be, can be relegated to prefer an appeal before the appropriate forum as provided under Sec. 372 of the Code.

(3.) Having noticed the offence involved where the sentence prescribed is less than 10 years. This Court had called upon the learned advocate on record for the appellant to take appropriate instructions.