20. She submitted that no right of appeal was available to the victim in law at the time the revision was filed and therefore, there was no scope for the court to even treat the revision as an appeal that ‘lay under the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short, “the Code of Criminal Procedure” or “Code”)’ at the time as provided for Under Section 401(5) above.
37. The Proviso to the above had not yet come into effect as on 19.01.2006 when the revision petition was filed, for it was added only w.e.f. 31.12.2009. The Proviso says – [Provided that the victim shall have a right to prefer an appeal against any order passed by the Court acquitting the Accused or convicting for a lesser offence or imposing inadequate compensation, and such appeal shall lie to the Court to which an appeal ordinarily lies against the order of conviction of such Court.]
i. Thus, the statutory right of appeal by a victim against such acquittal arose only from the date of the amendment w.e.f. 31.12.2009. As the said revision was filed by the father of the deceased on 19.01.2006 well before the above amendment, such right was not available at the relevant point of time.
ii. Therefore, the very first condition Under Section 401(5) itself would not have been possible to be fulfilled, i.e. the right of the victim to appeal did not lie under the Code at the time of filing the revision petition.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Criminal Appeal Nos. 5560-5561 of 2024
Decided On: 29.01.2025
Mahabir and Ors. Vs. State of Haryana
Hon’ble Judges/Coram:
J.B. Pardiwala, and R. Mahadevan, , JJ.
Author: J.B. Pardiwala, J.
Citation MANU/SC/0122/2025.
Read full judgment here: Click here.