CHARANJIT Vs. PREETO AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present appeal has been preferred along with application under Sec. 378(4) Cr.P.C for grant of leave to appeal against the judgment dated 5.8.2010 whereby, the complaint filed by the appellant for an offences under Sections 420/467/468, 471 and 120-B Penal Code was dismissed. Along with the present appeal the appellant has filed an application seeking condonation of delay of 1078 days in filing the present appeal.

(2.) It is pleaded in the application for condonation of delay that the appellant has filed an appeal before the learned Sessions Judge, Hoshiarpur but consequent to the judgment of Full Bench of this Court in case M/s. Tata Steel Ltd Vs. Atma Tube products Ltd., [2013(2) R.C.R.(Criminal) 1005 : ILR (2013)1 Pb. & Hy. 719] holding that in case of acquittal in complaint case, an appeal lies only before this Court, the same was withdrawn and presented before this Court.

(3.) We have heard the learned counsel for the appellant and find that no case is made out either on the application for condonation of delay or on merits against the order impugned. An appeal against the order of acquittal lies only before this Court and not before the Court of Sessions. The judgment of this Court in M/s. Tata Steel Ltd Vs. Atma Tube products Ltd. does not laid down any new law in respect of forum of appeal. It dealt with as to whether, the Complainant is required to seek leave to appeal or as a victim has a right to file appeal. Consequently, the application for condonation of delay does not warrant any consideration and, thus, dismissed.