LAWS(ALL)-1979-10-52

HAQIQULLA Vs. NIAZ AHMAD

Decided On October 19, 1979
HAQIQULLA Appellant
V/S
NIAZ AHMAD Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN a case of theft the Station Officer INcharge police station Itwa seized a truck bearing No. U. P. K. 1240. After investigation he submitted a final report and in consequence the case was dropped.

(2.) NIAZ Ahmad Opposite Party 1 and Haqiqullah applicant made two separate applications by means of which each of them claimed that the truck may be restored to his possession.

(3.) CHAPTER XXIX of the Code, which comprises of Sections 372 to 394, deals with appeals. Section 372 lays down that no appeal shall lie from any judgment or order of a criminal court except as provided for by the Code or by any other law for time being in force. Section 373 provides for appeals from orders requiring security or refusal to accept or rejecting surety for keeping peace or good behaviour. Section 374 provides for appeals from orders of conviction passed by the different courts. Section 377 deals with appeals by the State Government against the order of sentence, while Section 378 empowers the State Government to prefer appeals against orders of acquittal in certain cases. There are some other sections in the said CHAPTER which permit appeal in certain other cases. Section 391 of the Code, which appears in the fasciculus of provisions dealing with appeals permitted under CHAPTER XXIV, inter alia, provides that in dealing with any appeal under this CHAPTER, the Appellate Court if it thinks additional evidence to be necessary shall record its reasons and may either take such evidence itself, or direct it to be taken by a Magistrate, or when the Appellate Court is the High Court, by a Court of Sessions or Magistrate. It, therefore, follows from the language employed in Section 391 itself that additional evidence under the said section may be permitted by the court only when an appeal is preferred under any of the provisions contained in CHAPTER XXIX of the Code. Section 454 is included in CHAPTER XXXIV which bears the heading "Disposal of property." An appeal preferred under Section 454 cannot, therefore, be deemed to be an appeal preferred under CHAPTER XXIV. The court below was, therefore, not justified in admitting the additional evidence filed by Niaz Ahmad and deciding the appeal solely on the basis of such additional evidence.