FARID VELJEE Vs. NURALLAH KAMRUDDIN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally with the consent of parties.

(2.) Criminal Writ Petition No. 31/2022 is filed challenging the order dtd. 5/3/2022 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Panaji in Criminal Revision Application No. 40/2019 filed by the Petitioner/Complainant thereby challenging the inadequate sentence and compensation passed by the Trial Court. Such Revision was filed by the Petitioner/Complainant under Sec. 397 of Cr.P.C. on the premise that there is no Appeal available to the Petitioner/Complainant challenging only inadequate sentence though convicted by the learned Magistrate.

(3.) Mr. Nachinolkar appearing for the Petitioner/Complainant would submit that the learned Additional Sessions Judge rejected such Revision only on technical ground i.e. availability of Appeal for the Petitioner. He submits that the Complainant under Sec. 138 of the N.I. Act cannot be equated with a Victim as tried to be projected by the learned Additional Sessions Judge so as to allow such Victim to file an Appeal under Sec. 372 proviso of Cr.P.C. Mr. Nachinolkar placed reliance on the decision of the Division Bench of this Court in the case of Kushal Kawaduji Singanjude Vs. Ramnarayan Durgaprasad Agrawal, 2020 (1) Mh.L.J. 748.