DHARMENDRAKUMAR Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) We have heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties and the learned APP for the State on a very limited issue concerning the scope of hearing at the admission stage of an appeal under the proviso to Section 372 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short "Cr.P.C").

(2.) Earlier, there was a controversy whether an appeal by the victim under the proviso to Section 372 will be governed by Section 378 of Cr. P.C and whether it is necessary to obtain a leave to prefer such an appeal. Thus, the question was whether grant of leave in according with Section 378 of Cr. P.C was a condition precedent for entertaining an appeal under the proviso to Section 372. Now the said issue is laid to rest by a recent decision of the Apex Court of a Bench of three Hon'ble Judges in the case of Mallikarjun Kodagali Vs. State of Karnataka, 2018 SCC OnLine SC . The majority view is expressed by Hon'ble Mr. Justice Madan B. Lokur (as he then was) after considering the entire law on the subject. The said decision holds that under the proviso to Section 372 of Cr. P.C, an appeal against an Order of acquittal is available as a matter of right to the victim as defined and therefore, it is not necessary to seek a leave of the Court under Section 378 of Cr. P.C. The Apex Court held that the proviso to Section 372 must be given a realistic, liberal and progressive meaning which is beneficial to the victims of the offences. We, therefore, propose to direct the Registry to number this Application as a Criminal Appeal.

(3.) There cannot be any dispute that as far as the procedure is concerned, the Appeals whether against the Orders of acquittal or against the Orders of conviction are governed by Section 384 of Cr. P.C which reads thus:-