TUKLAL YADAV Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsels for the appellants and learned counsel for the State.

(2.) This reference to the Full Bench has arisen out of the Order dated 09.07.2018, passed in Cr. Appeal (S.J) No.1281 of 2016, Cr. Appeal (S.J) No.2066 of 2017, Cr. Appeal (S.J) No.2229 of 2017 and Cr. Appeal (S.J) No.825 of 2014, and all these appeals arise out of the appellate judgments / orders passed by the different Courts of Session, which were originally listed before the Hon'ble Single Judge for adjudication. The Hon'ble Single Judge, however, referred those matters to the Division Bench, in view of the Rule 152 of the High Court of Jharkhand Rules, 2001.

(3.) While these matters were taken up, an objection was raised by the learned counsel for the State that in view of the proviso to Section 372 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, these appeals shall lie before the Single Judge and not before the Division Bench. It was pointed out that the Proviso to Section 372 of the Cr.P.C., was brought in by an Amendment Act, with effect from 31.12.2009, whereas, the High Court of Jharkhand Rules were framed in the year 2001, and in view of the settled principle of law that the provisions of the Rules cannot override the provisions of the Act, the acquittal appeals arising out of appellate judgments / orders passed by the Courts of Session, shall lie before the Single Judge only, in view of the Proviso to Section 372 of the Cr.P.C., which provides that the victim shall have a right to appeal against acquittal, or conviction for lesser offence, or inadequate compensation, which would lie to the Court, to which, an appeal ordinarily lies against the order of conviction of such Court.