2015 (10) TMI 2483
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ffences punishable under Sections 498A and 304B of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short "IPC") and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 and alternatively for the offence punishable under Section 302 of IPC. Being aggrieved of the decision of the trial court, the appellant approached the High Court against the order of acquittal of respondent nos. 2 to 6. The High Court vide its judgment and order dated 04.03.2014 has upheld the trial court's decision of acquittal of all the accused persons. The impugned judgment and order of the High Court is challenged in this appeal before this Court questioning its correctness. 4. Being aggrieved of the impugned judgment and order the appellant being the legal heir of the deceased filed an appeal before the High Court under proviso to Section 372 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short "the Cr.P.C."). The High Court, however, has mechanically disposed of the appeal by passing a cryptic order without examining as to whether the leave to file an appeal filed by the appellant as provided under sub-Section (3) to Section 378 of Cr.P.C. can be granted or not. The correctness of the same is questioned by the appellant in this appeal ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....further urged by him that the High Court ought to have granted the leave to the appellant to file an appeal by the appellant as required under sub-Section (3) of Section 378 of Cr.P.C. and thereafter it ought to have examined and disposed of the appeal on merits. 8. He further vehemently contended that the appeal before the High Court was filed by the appellant challenging the acquittal order passed by the trial court but the High Court has concurred with the decision of the trial court mechanically without reappreciating the evidence on record. He further submitted that the decision of the High Court suffers from error in law as the High Court, being the Appellate Court, was required to re-appreciate the evidence on record to exercise its appellate jurisdiction in the appeal filed by the appellant with reference to the legal contentions urged in the memorandum of appeal but it has failed to do so. The High Court in a very cursory and casual manner has held that after a perusal of evidence on record it found no reason to interfere with the decision of the trial court as the prosecution has failed to establish beyond reasonable doubt that the charges levelled against all the accuse....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....has undertaken a comprehensive review of Cr.P.C. and its recommendations were found to be very appropriate in amending the Cr.P.C. particularly in relation to provisions concerning arrest, custody and remand, procedure to be followed in summons and warrantcases, compounding of offences and special protection in respect of women and inquiry and trial of persons of unsound mind. Further, the Law Commission in its report has noted the relevant aspect of the matter namely that the victims are the worst sufferers in a crime and they do not have much role in the Court proceedings. They need to be given certain rights and compensation so that there is no distortion of the criminal justice system. The said report of the Law Commission has also taken note of the views of the criminologist, penologist and reformers of criminal justice system at length and has focused on victimology, control of victimization and protection of the victims of crimes and the issues of compensation to be awarded in favour of them. Therefore, the Parliament on the basis of the aforesaid Report of the Law Commission, which is victim oriented in approach, has amended certain provisions of the Cr.P.C. and in that ame....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ve taken is sound. To expand the enacting clause, inflated by the proviso, sins against the fundamental rule of construction that a proviso must be considered in relation to the principal matter to which it stands as a proviso. A proviso ordinarily is but a proviso, although the golden rule is to read the whole section, inclusive of the proviso, in such manner that they mutually throw light on each other and result in a harmonious construction." (emphasis laid by this Court) 12. Further, a three Judge Bench of this Court by majority of 2:1 in the case of S. Sundaram Pillai v. V.R. Pattabiraman (1985) 1 SCC 591 has elaborately examined the scope of proviso to the substantive provision of the Section and rules of its interpretation. The relevant paras are reproduced hereunder: "30. Sarathi in Interpretation of Statutes at pages 294-295 has collected the following principles in regard to a proviso: (a)When one finds a proviso to a section the natural presumption is that, but for the proviso, the enacting part of the section would have included the subject-matter of the proviso. (b)A proviso must be construed with reference to the preceding parts of the clause to which it is app....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ion so as to except something which would have otherwise been within it or in some measure to modify the enacting clause. Sometimes a proviso may be embedded in the main provision and becomes an integral part of it so as to amount to a substantive provision itself." (emphasis supplied) Thus, from a reading of the abovesaid legal position laid down by this Court in the cases referred to supra, it is abundantly clear that the proviso to Section 372 of Cr.P.C. must be read along with its main enactment i.e., Section 372 itself and together with sub-Section (3) to Section 378 of Cr.P.C. otherwise the substantive provision of Section 372 of Cr.P.C. will be rendered nugatory, as it clearly states that no appeal shall lie from any judgment or order of a Criminal Court except as provided by Cr.P.C. 13. Thus, to conclude on the legal issue: "whether the appellant herein, being the father of the deceased, has statutory right to prefer an appeal to the High Court against the order of acquittal under proviso to Section 372 of Cr.P.C. without obtaining the leave of the High Court as required under sub-Section (3) to Section 378 of Cr.P.C.", this Court is of the view that the right of questi....