BABU ULIGAPPA BATTELI Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Learned Counsel for the applicant, Learned Counsel for respondent Nos. 2 and 3, and learned A.P.P. appearing for the State. The applicant is the original complainant who had filed a complaint against respondent No. 2 for offences punishable under the Prevention of Corruption Act. Pursuant to the complaint investigation was made and a charge-sheet was filed against respondent No. 2, and he was tried by the Special Judge. The trial Court, however, acquitted respondent No. 2 by judgment and order dated 11-5-2009.

(2.) Being aggrieved by the said judgment and order, the applicant has preferred this appeal under the proviso of section 372 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, and has also filed an application for condonation of delay caused in filing of this appeal.

(3.) It is submitted that the applicant is a victim within the meaning of section 2(wa) of the Criminal Procedure Code, and therefore, has a right to file an appeal against the order of acquittal in view of the amendment to section 372 of the Criminal Procedure Code. Secondly, it is submitted that the said amendment being a procedural amendment could have retrospective effect and therefore, the applicant would have a right to file an appeal and apply for a condonation of delay caused in filing this appeal.