Victim has right to appeal against acquittal of accused, no leave has to be sought, Supreme Court

The Supreme Court has reaffirmed that a victim of a crime has the right to appeal under the Proviso to Section 372 of Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) against the acquittal of the accused. Such an appeal has to be treated like a regular appeal and no leave has to be sought in such a situation..A Bench of Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and KM Joseph passed this order in an appeal against an order of Allahabad High Court..The accused-respondents were tried for offences under Section 452 and Section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code. They were acquitted by the trial court in 2016. The State government preferred an appeal against the same. In terms of Section 372 read with Section 378 of the CrPC, such leave was declined by the High Court..Subsequently, the appeal filed by the victim also came up before the High Court before another Bench. That Bench dismissed the victim’s appeal on the ground that another Bench had declined the State’s appeal. The order passed to that effect read:.“Since another Bench of this Court has already refused to grant leave and the government appeal itself stood dismissed in reference to the refusal to grant leave, it will not be congruous to unfold another course keeping pending to this appeal.”.The victim then approached the Supreme Court against the above order..The State government supported the stance of the victim submitting that rights of the victim have been enlarged in terms of the amendment carried out in 2009 by insertion of proviso to Section 372 of the CrPC. The proviso reads:.“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.”.It was submitted by the appellant-victim that the question whether the victim would also have to seek leave like the State has been considered and is no more res integra in view of the recent judgment of the Supreme Court in Mallikarjun Kodagalli (d) through legal representatives v. State of Karnataka & Ors. In that judgment, the Supreme Court had ruled that there is no need for a victim to apply for leave to appeal against an order of acquittal while preferring an appeal under proviso to Section 372 CrPC..It was, therefore, contended that since the right to appeal would be available, it is different from the appeal filed by the State seeking leave to appeal. The appeal filed by the victim in the present case ought not to have been dismissed at the threshold only on the ground that no leave has been granted to the State to appeal against the order of acquittal, the appellant submitted..The Court concurred with the said argument stating that the legal position enunciated in Mallikarjun Kodagalli would show that the appellant had a right to file the appeal and no leave has to be sought in such a situation. Such an appeal has to be dealt with as a regular appeal, the Court held..“We are in agreement with the aforesaid plea since the extracted portion of the impugned order shows that the only reason recorded for dismissing the appeal of the victim (in fact styled as leave to appeal) was on the ground that leave had not been granted to the Government to file the appeal..14. The legal position enunciated in Mallikarjun Kodagalli (d) through legal representatives (supra) would show that the appellant had a right to file the appeal and infact no leave has to be sought in such a situation. Thus, the appeal has to be dealt as a regular appeal.”.It, therefore, set aside the order of the High Court and allowed the appeal. The matter was remitted back to the High Court to be considered on merits..[Read Order]