Case Note & Summary
The Bombay High Court addressed the scope of hearing at the admission stage of an appeal filed by a victim under the proviso to Section 372 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C.). The applicant, Dharmendrakumar @ Sanjay Vijaynarayan Mishra, had filed Criminal Application No. 55 of 2017, which was treated as an appeal by the victim against an order of acquittal. The court noted that earlier there was a controversy whether such an appeal required leave under Section 378 Cr.P.C., but the Supreme Court in Mallikarjun Kodagali v. State of Karnataka (majority view by Justice Madan B. Lokur) settled that the appeal is a matter of right and no leave is necessary. The court then examined the procedure for admission of such appeals. It held that Section 384 Cr.P.C. governs the summary dismissal of appeals, including those by victims. Under Section 384(1), if upon examining the petition of appeal and the judgment, the appellate court considers that there is no sufficient ground for interfering, it may dismiss the appeal summarily, but only after giving the appellant or his pleader a reasonable opportunity of being heard (proviso (a)). The court clarified that the hearing at the admission stage is not a full-fledged hearing but an opportunity for the appellant to show that the appeal is not liable to be summarily dismissed. The court can consider the petition and the judgment to decide whether there is sufficient ground for interference. The court directed the Registry to number the application as a Criminal Appeal and listed it for hearing on admission. The judgment was delivered by Justices A.S. Oka and A.S. Gadkari on 1st February 2019.
Headnote
A) Criminal Procedure - Victim's Appeal - Proviso to Section 372 Cr.P.C. - Right of Appeal - The appeal by a victim against an order of acquittal is a matter of right and does not require leave under Section 378 Cr.P.C. as held by the Supreme Court in Mallikarjun Kodagali v. State of Karnataka. (Paras 2-3) B) Criminal Procedure - Summary Dismissal of Appeal - Section 384 Cr.P.C. - Scope of Hearing - At the admission stage, the appellate court may summarily dismiss the appeal under Section 384 Cr.P.C. if there is no sufficient ground for interference, but only after giving the appellant or his pleader a reasonable opportunity of being heard. The hearing is not a full-fledged hearing but an opportunity to show that the appeal is not liable to be summarily dismissed. (Paras 3-5) C) Criminal Procedure - Admission Stage - Hearing - The court at the admission stage can consider the petition of appeal and the judgment of the trial court to decide whether there is sufficient ground for interference. The hearing is limited to the question of admission and not the final disposal of the appeal. (Paras 4-5)
Issue of Consideration
What is the scope of hearing at the admission stage of an appeal filed by a victim under the proviso to Section 372 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973?
Final Decision
The court directed the Registry to number the application as a Criminal Appeal and listed it for hearing on admission. The court held that the appeal is a matter of right and no leave is required. At the admission stage, the court may summarily dismiss the appeal under Section 384 Cr.P.C. if there is no sufficient ground for interference, but only after giving the appellant a reasonable opportunity of being heard.
Law Points
- Appeal by victim under proviso to Section 372 Cr.P.C. is a matter of right
- no leave required under Section 378 Cr.P.C.
- Section 384 Cr.P.C. governs procedure for summary dismissal of appeals
- hearing at admission stage is not a full-fledged hearing but an opportunity to show sufficient ground for interference
