Kripa Shankar Harijan vs State Of U.P. And Another
2022 Latest Caselaw 20078 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
 
 

?Court No. - 31
 

 
Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 177 of 2011
 

 
Revisionist :- Kripa Shankar Harijan
 
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
 
Counsel for Revisionist :- H.S. Tiwari
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt. Advocate
 

 
Hon'ble Mohd. Aslam,J.

None present for the informant/revisionist to press the revision on the point of admission. Learned A.G.A. for the State is present.

The instant revision has been preferred by the informant/revisionist against the impugned judgment and order dated 28.2.2011 passed Additional Sessions Judge/F.T.C. Court No.7, Pratapgarh in Sessions Trial No.11 of 2007 (State Vs. Ashok Kumar Tiwari), arising out of Case Crime No.C-1 of 2005, under Sections 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and 3(1)(X) of SC/ST Act, P.S. Aspur Deosara, District Pratapgarh, by which the fine of Rs.1000/- was imposed against the accused Ashok Kumar Tiwari under Section 323 I.P.C., in default thereof, to undergo imprisonment for three months and was convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months under Section 3(1)(X) of SC/ST Act along with fine of Rs.1000/-, in default thereof, to further undergo imprisonment for one month. The opposite party no.2 Ashok Kumar Tiwari was acquitted from the charges of Sections 504 & 506 I.P.C. Feeling aggrieved by it, the informant/revisionist has preferred the instant revision seeking conviction of the opposite party no.2 Ashok Kumar Tiwari for offence punishable under Section 504 & 506 I.P.C. as well as enhancement of punishment awarded under Sections 323 I.P.C. & 3(1)(X) of SC/ST Act.

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the revision and has submitted that according to provision of Section 372 Cr.P.C. (inserted and effective from 31.12.2009), the informant has right to prefer appeal on the same ground.

I have gone through the impugned judgment and order dated 28.2.2011 and perused the record. The impugned judgment and order was passed on 28.2.2011 and the appeal on the ground shown in the revision can be filed according to provision of Section 372 Cr.P.C., which speaks as follows:-

"S. 372. No appeal shall lie from any judgment or order of a Criminal Court except as provided for by this Code or by any other law for the time being in force:

[Provided that the victim shall have a right to prefer an appeal against any order passed by the Court acquitting the accused or convicting for a lesser offence or imposing inadequate compensation, and such appeal shall lie to the Court to which an appeal ordinarily lies against the order of conviction of such Court.]"

In view of the facts and circumstances of the case and in event of insertion of the proviso to Section 372 Cr.P.C., the instant revision is not maintainable. Accordingly, the present revision is dismissed at the admission stage.

However, it is always open for the revisionist to prefer an appeal against the impugned judgment and order in accordance with law.

Order Date :- 6.12.2022

Anil K. Sharma