Ram Shankar vs State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. ...
2025 Latest Caselaw 11929 ALL

Allahabad High Court

Ram Shankar vs State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. ... on 30 October, 2025

Author: Pramod Kumar Srivastava

Bench: Pramod Kumar Srivastava

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
 
 


Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:67698
 

 
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
LUCKNOW 
 
APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 9092 of 2025   
 
   Ram Shankar    
 
  .....Applicant(s)   
 
 Versus  
 
   State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another    
 
  .....Opposite Party(s)       
 
   
 
  
 
Counsel for Applicant(s)   
 
:   
 
Piyush Mishra   
 
  
 
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)   
 
:   
 
G.A., Javed Khan, Prem Prakash Singh   
 
     
 
 Court No. - 28
 
   
 
 HON'BLE PRAMOD KUMAR SRIVASTAVA, J.     

1. Sri Prem Prakash Singh, Advocate has filed his Vakalatnama today in Court on behalf of opposite party No.2. The same is taken on record.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that this petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed challenging the proceedings of Criminal Appeal No. 6/2023: Amrit Lal Vs. State of U.P. and others filed by the opposite party No.2, under Section 374 Cr.P.C. against the judgment and order dated 10.01.2023 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division)/Judicial Magistrate, Tanda, Ambedkar Nagar in Criminal Case No. 4651/2020: State vs. Rama Shankar arising out of N.C.R. No. 51/2017, under Sections 323, 504 I.P.C., Police Station Malipur, District Ambdekar Nagar, whereby petitioner awarded punishment of fine of Rs. 500/- under Section 323 I.P.C. and Rs. 250/- under Section 504 I.P.C. as penalty, failing which 10 days additional simple imprisonment. He further submits that the petitioner has also challenged the order dated 10.02.2023 passed by the Session Judge, Ambedkar Nagar in Criminal Appeal No. 6/2023: Amrit Lal Vs. State of U.P. and others, whereby admitted the appeal filed by the opposite party No.2, under Section 374 Cr.P.C. and notice has been issued to the petitioner ignoring the legal position and prayer sought in the appeal.

3. The brief facts of the case are that the opposite party No.2 i.e. Amrit Lal son of Babu Ram, R/o Village-Ruhullahpur, Police Station- Malipur, District-Ambedkar Nagar, U.P. made a complaint on 20.5.2017 to the SHO, Police Station- Malipur, District- Ambedkar Nagar stating that when he was going to his house from closing of his shop of Gas Building, when he reached at Tarakhurad road about 100 meter distance from Rajat Public School, then Shiv Kumar son of Ram Shankar met alongwith two other companion and started abuse and threatened to complainant due to old enmity. On the complaint of opposite party No.2, the SHO registered the complaint as NCR No.51/2017, under Section 323, 504 ?.?.?.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that after the investigation in the matter, the Investigating Officer has submitted chargesheet/report No.Nil/2017 dated 27.6.2017, under Section 323, 504 I.P.C. against the petitioner. During course of investigation, it was found that in the said incident, Shiv Kumar was not involved but the petitioner-Ram Shankar having involvement in the alleged incident.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the learned trial court took cognizance upon the chargesheet and summoned the petitioner. The said case was registered as Criminal Case No.4651/2020 (old Case No.1936/2017), State vs. Rama Shankar. After receiving the summon, the petitioner appeared before the learned trial court and moved an application in respect of recording confession, consequently he accepted the charges levelled against him and stated that he belongs to the poor family and does not want to contest the case on merit and also requested that the matter may be decided on the basis of his confessional statement by imposing penalty/fine as prescribed under law.

6. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the the learned trial court considered the petitioner's application and after hearing the parties and contents mentioned in the application by the petitioner and perusal of records, passed order dated 10.1.2023 whereby trial court find the petitioner guilty, awarded punishment to petitioner of fine of Rs. 500/- under Section 323 I.P.C. and Rs. 250/- under Section 504 I.P.C. as penalty, failing which 10 days additional simple imprisonment.

7. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the opposite party No.2 i.e. informant has filed an appeal under Section 374 Cr.P.C. against the judgment and order dated 10.01.2023 with the prayer before the appellate court that appeal may be accepted/admitted and set-aside the impugned judgment and order and summon the petitioner.

8. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the appellate Court i.e Session Judge vide order dated 10.02.2023 has admitted the appeal and issued notice to the petitioner.

9. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned counsel for the opposite party No.2 and learned A.G.A. for the State.

10. Before adverting to the merits of the petition, it is considered appropriate to refer to the relevant provisions of the Cr.P.C. pertaining to the filing of an appeal, as mentioned hereinafter. "372. No appeal to lie unless otherwise provided.

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.] 374. Appeals from convictions.

(1) Any person convicted on a trial held by a High Court in its extraordinary original criminal jurisdiction may appeal to the Supreme Court.

(2) Any person convicted on a trial held by a Sessions Judge or an Additional Sessions Judge or on a trial held by any other court in which a sentence of imprisonment for more than seven years [has been passed against him or against any other person convicted at the same trial] may appeal to the High Court.

(3) Save as otherwise provided in sub-section (2), any person, -

(a) convicted on a trial held by a Metropolitan Magistrate or Assistant Sessions Judge or Magistrate of the first class, or of the second class, or

(b) sentenced under Section 325, or

(c) in respect of whom an order has been made or a sentence has been passed under Section 360 by any Magistrate, may appeal to the Court of Session.

(4) [When an appeal has been filed against a sentence passed under section 376, section 376A, section 376AB, section 376B, section 376C, section 376D, section 376DA, section 376DB or section 376E of the Indian Penal Code, the appeal shall be disposed of within a period of six months from the date of filing of such appeal]"

Thus, from the above statutory provisions, it is apparent that under Section 374 Cr.P.C. criminal appeal only be filed before the court having jurisdiction, when accused has been convicted, but as per proviso contained under Section 372 of C.P.C. If the accused has been convicted for a lesser offence or he has been imposed inadequate compensation, then the victim can prefer appeal in such a manner as it lies against the order of conviction of such Court.

11. In the present case the complainant-Amrit Lal has filed Criminal Appeal under Section 374 Cr.P.C. before the Session Court against the impugned judgment and order dated 10.01.2023 passed by the Civil Judge (Junior Division)/Judicial Magistrate, Tanda, Ambedkar Nagar, wherein accused Ram Shankar has been convicted for the offence under Section 323/504 I.P.C. and awarded sentence of fine of Rs. 500/- and Rs. 200/- respectively and the Criminal Appeal against the impugned judgment has been admitted by the Session Court on 10.02.2023.

12. The main grievance of the petitioner is that the Criminal Appeal No. 6/2023: Amrit Lal Vs. State of U.P. and others filed by the complainant-Amrit Lal under Section 374 of the Cr.P.C. is not consonance with the statutory law and the Session court also made error in admitting the said criminal appeal under Section 374 of Cr.P.C., while it should be preferred only the provision contained under Section 372 of Cr.P.C.

13. Learned counsel for opposite party No.2 as well as the learned A.G.A. have fairly conceded the legal position and admitted that the said criminal appeal has been filed in an improper manner. It is further submitted that appropriate correction shall be sought before the appellate court.

14. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the settled proposition of law, it is made clear that once a criminal appeal is filed, it is to be decided on merits unless the parties have died. However, if there is any mistake with respect to the relevant provision or section of law, the same may be corrected on the prayer of the concerned party. It is also the duty of the Court to examine whether the criminal appeal instituted is maintainable and can be admitted in law. The petitioner is at liberty to file an objection before the appellate court and to raise the question of maintainability under the provisions of Section 374 Cr.P.C.

15. Thus, it is directed that if the petitioner files any objection before the appellate court, it shall be decided in accordance with law.

16. In view of the above observations/directions, the petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. is disposed of.

(Pramod Kumar Srivastava,J.)

October 30, 2025

Arvind