Home Case Index All Cases Indian Laws Indian Laws + HC Indian Laws - 2017 (12) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (12) TMI 776 - HC - Indian LawsConstruction and interpretation of essentially two provisions of the Code - Section 372 - Section 378 - whether the complainant in a complaint case for an offence punishable under Section 138 of the Act of 1881 is a victim as defined under Section 2(wa) of the Code, as amended by Act No.5 of 2009? - Held that: - Such a complainant is not a victim within the meaning of Section 2(wa) of the Code and would stand excluded therefrom, by virtue of the fact that the accused in such a case is not subjected to a charge. - the question is answered in the negative. Whether such a complainant would be entitled to file an appeal under the proviso to Section 372 of the Code before the Court to which an appeal lies against conviction - Held that: - As such a complainant does not come within the ambit of a victim under Section 2(wa) of the Code, his only remedy is to prefer an appeal under Section 378(4) of the Code, with special leave - answered in negative. Whether the complainant in a complaint case for the offence punishable under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act or for any other offence either bailable or non-bailable is required to file an appeal against acquittal in a complaint case seeking special leave of the Court under Section 378 (4) of Cr. P.C.? - Held that: - a complainant in a complaint case relating to an offence under Section 138 of the Act of 1881 would be required to file an appeal against acquittal in such case only under Section 378(4) of the Code, after seeking special leave. In all other complaint cases relating to offences, either bailable or non-bailable, even if the accused therein is charged, the complainant therein would not have the right of preferring an appeal under the proviso to Section 372 of the Code and he would have to continue to avail the special remedy of appeal provided to him under Section 378(4) of the Code, duly seeking special leave - the appeal filed under the proviso to Section 372 of the Code by the first respondent herein, the complainant in a complaint case under Section 138 of the Act of 1881, is not maintainable. It is not a sound principle of construction to brush aside words in a statute as being inapposite surplusage, if they can have appropriate application in circumstances conceivably within the contemplation of the statute. Petition disposed off.
|