'Victims' can challenge acquittal under Sec 372 CrPC: Supreme Court
NEW DELHI: Referring to provision of Section 372 of CrPC which was amended in 2009 on recommendation of Law Commission to allow a victim to file appeal, Supreme Court has held that a "victim" of an offence like in cheque bouncing cases has the right to challenge the order of acquittal of the accused under CrPC and corresponding Section 413 of BNSS.
Differentiating between Sec 372 & Sec 378 (which allows a complainant to file appeal), a bench of Justices B V Nagarathna and Satish Sharma said Section 378 circumcised the right to file an appeal which is not the case with Section 372.
"The proviso to Sec 372 of CrPC was inserted in statute book with effect from 31.12.2009. The object and reason for such insertion must be realised and must be given its full effect to by a court. In view of the aforesaid discussion, we hold that the victim of an offence has the right to prefer an appeal under the proviso to Section 372 of CrPC, irrespective of whether he is a complainant or not. Even if the victim of an offence is a complainant, he can still proceed under the proviso to Section 372 and need not advert to sub-section (4) of Section 378 of CrPC,
SC said victim of a crime must have an absolute right to prefer an appeal which cannot be circumscribed by any condition and the right of a victim of a crime must be placed on par with right of an accused who after being convicted has a right to file an appeal under Section 374 of CrPC. TNN
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New Indian Express
38 minutes ago
- New Indian Express
Salwa Judum case: Legislative workaround and limits of contempt power
The doctrine of separation of powers must always be acknowledged in a constitutional democracy, the Supreme Court said in its May 15 order ruling that any law made by Parliament or state legislatures cannot be held to be in contempt of court. The decision by a bench of Justices B V Nagarathna and Satish Chandra Sharma came while dismissing a 2012 contempt petition filed by sociologist Nandini Sundar and others against the Chhattisgarh government for enacting the Auxiliary Armed Police Force Act, 2011, alleging the law violated an earlier SC order. The bench held that the law did not amount to contempt of the SC's 2011 landmark judgment that disbanded the state government-backed Salwa Judum, terming it unconstitutional. Salwa Judum was a government-backed militia formed in Chhattisgarh in 2005, which used armed tribal civilians to combat Maoist violence. The contempt plea claimed that the Chhattisgarh government failed to comply with the 2011 order to stop open backing of vigilante groups like the Salwa Judum, and instead went ahead and armed tribal youths in the fight against Maoists. It said there had been a clear contempt of the SC order when the state government passed the Chhattisgarh Auxiliary Armed Police Force Act, 2011, which legalised arming tribals in the form of Special Police Officers (SPOs) in the war against Maoists. The petitioners further submitted that instead of disarming SPOs, which was a key constituent of the SC's 2011 order, the Chhattisgarh government legalised the practice of arming them. They also argued that the victims of the Salwa Judum movement had not been adequately compensated. In the latest ruling of May 15, the Supreme Court said the Chhattisgarh Auxiliary Armed Police Force Act, 2011 does not constitute a contempt of court per se, and that the balance between sovereign functionaries must always be delicately maintained. 'Every State Legislature has plenary powers to pass an enactment and so long as the said enactment has not been declared to be ultra vires the Constitution or, in any way, null and void by a Constitutional Court, the said enactment would have the force of law," the bench said. If any party wants that the legislation be struck down for being unconstitutional, the legal remedies would have to be presented before an appropriate constitutional court, the bench noted.
Time of India
3 hours ago
- Time of India
Student's death: Murder case filed against med college principal, others
Kota: City police have registered a murder case against the principal of Kota Govt Medical College, a hostel warden and two MBBS students following directions from the State Commission for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (SC/ST Commission). The case relates to the death of Sunil Bairwa, a 28-year-old third-year MBBS student, who was found hanging in the college's hostel room in March this year. T he accused include Dr Sangeeta Saxena, the college principal, an unidentified hostel warden, and two MBBS students - Adarsh Fojdar and Sandeep. The case has been registered under different sections of BNS and the SC/ST Act at the Mahaveer Nagar police station. The development comes after the deceased student's father filed a plea with both state and national SC/ST commissions, alleging his son was murdered. According to the father's complaint, the college administration denied his son permission to appear for examinations and was allegedly harassed by the warden and two fellow students. Initially, police treated the case as a suicide and registered it under section 194 of BNSS. However, following the commission's intervention, the investigation has now been elevated to a murder case and transferred to the Deputy Superintendent of Police of the area. Circle Inspector Ramesh Kavia of Mahaveer Nagar police station confirmed that while preliminary evidence suggested suicide, a fresh investigation would be conducted under the new charges.
Time of India
4 hours ago
- Time of India
Assam to use 75-yr-old law to push back illegal migrants
Guwahati: Assam govt is preparing to use a 75-year-old previously overlooked law to pushback illegal migrants from the state without any judicial intervention immediately after their identification. CM Himanta Biswa Sarma on Saturday said a constitutional bench of the Supreme Court , while hearing a case on Section 6A of the Citizenship Act (October, 2024), had said there is no legal requirement for the Assam govt to always approach the judiciary to identify foreigners and "we are examining this". "There is an old law called the Immigrants Expulsion Order (1950), and during hearing on Section 6A of the Citizenship Act, the constitutional bench of the Supreme Court said this Act is still valid. Under its provisions, even a district commissioner can issue an order for immediate pushback of illegal immigrants," he added. "For whatever reason, our lawyers had not informed us about this, and we weren't aware of it either," Himanta added. He said in the past few days, the entire matter has come to light and the state govt will now discuss it seriously. "The process of identifying foreigners, which had paused due to NRC-related matters, will now be sped up a bit. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Giao dịch CFD với công nghệ và tốc độ tốt hơn IC Markets Đăng ký Undo This time, if someone is identified as a foreigner and we don't send them to a tribunal. We will straightway push them back. Preparations for this have been ongoing over the last few days," he said. He underlined that those who have moved courts will not be pushed back for now. The Immigrants (Expulsion from Assam) Act, 1950 (IEAA) empowers the central govt to order expulsion of any person or class of persons who have come into Assam from outside India, either before or after the commencement of this Act, and whose stay in Assam is detrimental to the interests of the general public of India or any Scheduled Tribe in Assam. Sarma was referring to the five-member Constitution Bench headed by then chief justice DY Chandrachud on October 17, 2024 which upheld the validity of Section 6A of the Citizenship Act in a 4:1 majority with Justice JB Pardiwala giving the sole dissenting opinion. Justices Surya Kant, MM Sundresh and Manoj Misra in their joint order said the provisions of the Immigrants (Expulsion from Assam) Act, 1950 "shall be effectively employed for the purpose of identification of illegal immigrants." They noted that the IEAA grants "Central Government the power to direct the removal of immigrants who are detrimental to the interests of India." "If there is any other piece of legislation such as the IEAA, under which the status of an immigrant can be determined, we see no reason as to why such statutory detection shall also not be given effect to, for the purposes of deportation. We thus hold that the provisions of IEAA shall also be read into Section 6A and be applied along with the Foreigners Act, 1946 for the purpose of detection and deportation of foreigners," the judges noted in their order. WHAT IS IEAA Enacted even before the immigrants from West and East Pakistan were considered foreigners under Foreigners Act The Statement of Objects and Reasons states the Act was enacted to deal with the large scale immigration of migrants from East Bengal to Assam Other statutory enactments to address the influx of immigrants in Assam Section 6A of the Citizenship Act, the Foreigners Act, 1946, the Foreigners (Tribunals) Order, 1964, the Passport (Entry into India) Act, 1920 and the Passport Act, 1967. Guwahati: Assam govt is preparing to use a 75-year-old previously overlooked law to pushback illegal migrants from the state without any judicial intervention immediately after their identification. CM Himanta Biswa Sarma on Saturday said a constitutional bench of the Supreme Court, while hearing a case on Section 6A of the Citizenship Act (October, 2024), had said there is no legal requirement for the Assam govt to always approach the judiciary to identify foreigners and "we are examining this". "There is an old law called the Immigrants Expulsion Order (1950), and during hearing on Section 6A of the Citizenship Act, the constitutional bench of the Supreme Court said this Act is still valid. Under its provisions, even a district commissioner can issue an order for immediate pushback of illegal immigrants," he added. "For whatever reason, our lawyers had not informed us about this, and we weren't aware of it either," Himanta added. He said in the past few days, the entire matter has come to light and the state govt will now discuss it seriously. "The process of identifying foreigners, which had paused due to NRC-related matters, will now be sped up a bit. This time, if someone is identified as a foreigner and we don't send them to a tribunal. We will straightway push them back. Preparations for this have been ongoing over the last few days," he said. He underlined that those who have moved courts will not be pushed back for now. The Immigrants (Expulsion from Assam) Act, 1950 (IEAA) empowers the central govt to order expulsion of any person or class of persons who have come into Assam from outside India, either before or after the commencement of this Act, and whose stay in Assam is detrimental to the interests of the general public of India or any Scheduled Tribe in Assam. Sarma was referring to the five-member Constitution Bench headed by then chief justice DY Chandrachud on October 17, 2024 which upheld the validity of Section 6A of the Citizenship Act in a 4:1 majority with Justice JB Pardiwala giving the sole dissenting opinion. Justices Surya Kant, MM Sundresh and Manoj Misra in their joint order said the provisions of the Immigrants (Expulsion from Assam) Act, 1950 "shall be effectively employed for the purpose of identification of illegal immigrants." They noted that the IEAA grants "Central Government the power to direct the removal of immigrants who are detrimental to the interests of India." "If there is any other piece of legislation such as the IEAA, under which the status of an immigrant can be determined, we see no reason as to why such statutory detection shall also not be given effect to, for the purposes of deportation. We thus hold that the provisions of IEAA shall also be read into Section 6A and be applied along with the Foreigners Act, 1946 for the purpose of detection and deportation of foreigners," the judges noted in their order. WHAT IS IEAA Enacted even before the immigrants from West and East Pakistan were considered foreigners under Foreigners Act The Statement of Objects and Reasons states the Act was enacted to deal with the large scale immigration of migrants from East Bengal to Assam Other statutory enactments to address the influx of immigrants in Assam Section 6A of the Citizenship Act, the Foreigners Act, 1946, the Foreigners (Tribunals) Order, 1964, the Passport (Entry into India) Act, 1920 and the Passport Act, 1967.
