Friday July 20, 2018
Home India Supreme Court...

Supreme Court Upholds it’s Earlier Verdict: Victim Cannot Appeal Without High Court’s Permission

0
//
90
land
Supreme Court of India., Wikimedia
Republish
Reprint

New Delhi, April 13, 2017: The Supreme Court has refused to reconsider its verdict holding that a victim in a criminal case cannot file an appeal against an order of acquittal without permission of the high court concerned.

A bench of Justices Adarsh Kumar Goel and Uday Umesh Lalit said there was no need to refer the matter to a larger bench for reconsideration of its 2015 judgement in which it was held that a victim cannot file an appeal against an order of acquittal without the leave of the high court.

The issue had arisen after a victim had appealed to the Gauhati High Court, who had not taken its permission to file the petition challenging the acquittal of the accused in a rape case.

As the appeal of the victim was admitted by the high court, the man, who was acquitted by the trial court in Tripura, moved the apex court which had appointed an amicus curiae to assist it in the matter, mentioned PTI.

Follow Newsgram to get the latest news from India.

“Though the amicus curie has suggested that these matters be referred to a larger bench for reconsideration of the decision of this court, we do not think that such a course ought to be adopted in the present matter. The special leave petition has been pending in this court for last 5 years.

“In any case, in the present matter the victim had preferred an application to treat the appeal initially filed under Section 372 to be one under Section 372 read with Section 378 CrPC. Though the high court observed that no such leave was necessary, the matter now assumes a different complexion in the light of the decision in…. the (earlier judgement),” the bench said.

It said, “Since there is already an application on behalf of the victim to treat the appeal before the high court under Section 372 read with Section 378 CrPC, in our considered view the leave ought to be granted, which we at present do.

“The pending appeal shall now be considered on merits by the high court. This appeal, thus, stands disposed of.”

Section 372 of the CrPC deals with the rights of the victim to file an appeal against acquittal, conviction of accused for a lesser offence and imposition of inadequate compensation.

The man was acquitted by the trial court of charges of rape, wrongful confinement and criminal intimidation.

In the rape case, the victim appealed against the trial court judgment before the high court and when the appeal was listed for admission, an objection was taken by the accused that unless ‘leave’ was granted, the appeal could not be admitted.

To this, the victim filed a petition for treating the criminal appeal to be filed under the relevant provisions.

But the high court had held that there was an unfettered right conferred upon the victim by Section 372 CrPC and that no leave was required for the victim to file such appeal.

The accused, however, challenged the high court order in the apex court.

– Prepared by Upama Bhattacharya. Twitter @Upama_myself

Click here for reuse options!
Copyright 2017 NewsGram

Next Story

CBSE Over Errors In NEET Question Paper Summoned By Madras High Court

The judges had also criticised the CBSE

0
CBSE Over NEET Question Paper Errors Summoned By Madras High Court
CBSE Over NEET Question Paper Errors Summoned By Madras High Court. Flickr

The Madras High Court Bench here today came down heavily on the CBSE observing that it was being autocratic in the matter related to errors in the Tamil version of this year’s National Eligibility cum Entrance Test.

A bench of justices C T Selvam and A M Basheer Ahamed made the observation while hearing a public interest litigation filed by CPI-M leader T K Rangarajan, seeking award of full marks for 49 ‘erroneous’ questions in the Tamil version of the NEET.

It said that despite knowing that a PIL on the matter was filed and it was due for hearing, the CBSE had released the results.

“Why did they do so?”, the court asked.

Referring to the CBSE’s submission, the bench said, “How do you decide the right answers for the questions based on majority view? CBSE is accepting even wrong answers under the pretext of majority decision. How is that in Bihar state so many students got through the examination?” it asked.

Later, it adjourned the hearing on the PIL without mentioning any date.

The petitioner has submitted that key words in the Tamil questions were wrongly translated from English and this caused confusion for the students.

In the previous hearing, the court had asked the CBSE to file an affidavit stating among others on whether any exercise was undertaken to ascertain which of the English words in the syllabi for science subjects were incapable of being reproduced in an equivalent word in Tamil.

Madras High court, walk in room
Madras High court, walk in room. flickr

Also read: Woman Can Have Husband’s Salary Information: MP High Court

The judges had also criticised the CBSE saying that the mistakes in the question paper were not mere ambiguity. (IANS)