Case Note & Summary
The State of Goa, through the Inspector of Legal Metrology, filed a criminal complaint against M/s Bata India Ltd. and its managers under Section 39 of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act, 1976 and related rules for alleged irregularities in MRP printing on shoe packages. The trial court acquitted the accused. The State then filed a composite application for leave to appeal under Section 378(4) and appeal under Section 378(1)(b) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 before the High Court. The respondent raised a preliminary objection regarding maintainability, arguing that the State, as a complainant, should have sought leave from the trial court under Section 378(4) Cr.P.C. The High Court examined the issue and held that the State, when acting as a complainant in a private complaint, is not entitled to file an appeal directly under Section 378(1)(b) but must comply with Section 378(4), which requires leave from the trial court. Since no such leave was obtained, the appeal was dismissed as not maintainable.
Headnote
A) Criminal Procedure - Appeal against acquittal - Section 378(4) Cr.P.C. - Maintainability - State as complainant in a private complaint under the Standards of Weights and Measures Act, 1976 - The State, through the Inspector of Legal Metrology, filed a complaint and subsequently sought to appeal the acquittal without obtaining leave from the trial court as required under Section 378(4) Cr.P.C. - Held that the appeal is not maintainable as the State, when acting as a complainant in a private complaint, must comply with the requirement of seeking leave from the trial court under Section 378(4) Cr.P.C. (Paras 2-4, 7-8).
Issue of Consideration
Whether an appeal against acquittal under Section 378(4) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 is maintainable when the State, as a complainant, did not obtain leave from the trial court before filing the appeal.
Final Decision
The High Court dismissed the application for leave to appeal and the appeal as not maintainable, upholding the acquittal.
Law Points
- Maintainability of appeal under Section 378(4) Cr.P.C.
- Requirement of leave from trial court
- State as complainant in private complaint
- Standards of Weights and Measures Act
- 1976
Case Details
Criminal Application (Main) No.180 of 2016
Mr. S. R. Rivankar, Public Prosecutor for the appellant; Mr. G. Sardessai, Advocate for the respondent no.1
State, Through the Inspector, Legal Metrology, Margao, Goa
M/s Bata India Ltd., Shri C. Pathari, Shri V. R. Keshavan
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Criminal appeal against acquittal under the Standards of Weights and Measures Act, 1976.
Remedy Sought
The State sought leave to appeal and quashing of the acquittal order passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate.
Filing Reason
The State was aggrieved by the acquittal of the accused for alleged violations of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act and Rules.
Previous Decisions
The trial court (Chief Judicial Magistrate) acquitted the accused on 25.1.2016.
Issues
Whether the appeal under Section 378(4) Cr.P.C. is maintainable when the State, as a complainant, did not obtain leave from the trial court.
Submissions/Arguments
Respondent no.1 argued that the application under Section 378(4) Cr.P.C. is not maintainable as the State, being a complainant, should have sought leave from the trial court.
The Public Prosecutor contended that the appeal is maintainable under Section 378(4) Cr.P.C.
Ratio Decidendi
An appeal against acquittal under Section 378(4) Cr.P.C. requires the complainant to obtain leave from the trial court; the State, when acting as a complainant in a private complaint, is not exempt from this requirement and cannot directly appeal under Section 378(1)(b) Cr.P.C.
Judgment Excerpts
By this composite application for leave to appeal under Section 378(4) of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 and appeal under Section 378(1)(b) of Cr.P.C., the State ... seeks quashing of impugned judgment and order dated 25.1.2016 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate by which the accused nos.1 and 2 came to be acquitted.
The learned Counsel appearing for the respondent no.1 raised an issue of very maintainability of this application under Section 378(4) of Cr.P.C.
Procedural History
The State filed a criminal complaint (Case No.1140/OA/WM/05/A) against the respondents under the Standards of Weights and Measures Act, 1976. The trial court acquitted the accused on 25.1.2016. The State then filed a composite application for leave to appeal and appeal before the High Court on an unspecified date. The High Court heard the matter and dismissed it on 30.7.2019.
Acts & Sections
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973: 378(1)(b), 378(4)
- Standards of Weights and Measures Act, 1976: 39, 74
- Standards of Weights and Measures (Packaged Commodities) Rules, 1977: 23(1), 23(2), 23(6), 23(7)
