Case Note & Summary
The applicant, Babu Uligappa Batteli, was the original complainant who filed a complaint against respondent no.2 for offences under the Prevention of Corruption Act. Investigation led to a chargesheet and trial, but the Special Judge acquitted respondent no.2 on 11.5.2009. Aggrieved, the applicant filed an appeal under the proviso to Section 372 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, along with an application for condonation of delay. The applicant argued that he is a 'victim' under Section 2(wa) CrPC and thus has a right to appeal, and that the amendment to Section 372, being procedural, should apply retrospectively. Respondent no.2 contended that the complainant cannot be termed a victim under Section 2(wa), relying on Prakash C. Sheth v. State of Maharashtra, and that the amendment came into force on 31.12.2009, after the trial court judgment, so it cannot apply retrospectively, citing National Commission for Women v. State of Delhi. The court, after hearing both sides, found that the issues raised require consideration and admitted the appeal, directing that the application for condonation of delay be considered at the time of final hearing.
Headnote
A) Criminal Procedure - Right of Victim to Appeal - Section 372 proviso, Section 2(wa) CrPC - Whether complainant under Prevention of Corruption Act is a 'victim' - Court considered the definition of victim and the right to appeal against acquittal - Held that the matter requires consideration and admitted the appeal (Paras 1-6).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the applicant, as original complainant in a Prevention of Corruption Act case, is a 'victim' under Section 2(wa) CrPC and entitled to file an appeal against acquittal under the amended Section 372 CrPC, and whether the amendment has retrospective effect.
Final Decision
The court admitted the appeal and directed that the application for condonation of delay be considered at the time of final hearing.
Law Points
- Right of victim to appeal against acquittal under Section 372 CrPC
- Retrospective effect of procedural amendment
- Definition of victim under Section 2(wa) CrPC
Case Details
2011 LawText (BOM) (12) 62
Criminal Application No.46 of 2011 in Criminal Appeal St. No. 35 of 2011
V.M. Kanade, M.L. Tahaliyani
Mr. Murtaza Najmi a/w A.K. Moily for Applicant, Mr. P.S. Hingorani A.P.P. for State, Mr. Kamlesh Mali a/w Pawan Mali for Respondent No.2, Mr. H. Shaikh with Dhiraj Bansode for Respondent No.3
The State of Maharashtra, Pralhad Bhaurao Sable, Ayub Babu Khan
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Criminal appeal against acquittal with application for condonation of delay
Remedy Sought
Applicant seeks to file appeal against acquittal of respondent no.2 under Prevention of Corruption Act
Filing Reason
Applicant aggrieved by acquittal of respondent no.2 by Special Judge on 11.5.2009
Previous Decisions
Trial Court acquitted respondent no.2 on 11.5.2009
Issues
Whether the applicant is a 'victim' under Section 2(wa) CrPC and entitled to appeal under Section 372 proviso
Whether the amendment to Section 372 CrPC has retrospective effect
Submissions/Arguments
Applicant: He is a victim under Section 2(wa) CrPC and has right to appeal; amendment is procedural and retrospective.
Respondent No.2: Complainant under PC Act is not a victim; amendment not retrospective as it came into force after trial court judgment.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the issues raised require consideration and admitted the appeal, leaving the question of condonation of delay to be decided at final hearing.
Judgment Excerpts
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for respondent nos 2 and 3, and learned A.P.P. appearing for the State.
The applicant is the original complainant who had filed a complaint against respondent no.2 for offences punishable under the Prevention of Corruption Act.
Being aggrieved by the said judgment and order, the applicant has preferred this appeal under the proviso of Section 372 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, and has also filed an application for condonation of delay caused in filing of this appeal.
Procedural History
Complaint filed by applicant under Prevention of Corruption Act -> Investigation and chargesheet -> Trial by Special Judge -> Acquittal on 11.5.2009 -> Applicant filed appeal with condonation of delay application on 13.12.2011.
Acts & Sections
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973: Section 2(wa), Section 372
- Prevention of Corruption Act:
