State vs Santosh Singh And Others
2022 Latest Caselaw 1581 Chatt

                                           1

                                                                                  NAFR

               HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

                                     ACQA No.93 of 2010
   • State of Chhattisgarh Through:- Station House Officer, Police Station- City
     Kotwali, District- Bilaspur, C.G.

                                                                           ---- Appellant
                                         Versus
  1. Santosh Singh S/o Late Sumer Singh Chandel, aged about 33 years

  2. Lalmati Singh W/o Late Sumer Singh Chandel, aged about 60 years

  3. Sasi Singh D/o Late Sumer Singh Chandel aged about 29 years

  4. Smt. Seema Singh W/o Kunjlal Singh, aged about 30 years

     All R/o Mukt Nagar, Padmanabhpur Colony, Durg, District- Durg, C.G.

                                                                      ---- Respondents

For Appellant/State : Mr. Vimlesh Bajpai, G.A. For Respondent/s : Mr. Parag Kotecha, Advocate.

Hon'ble Shri Justice Arvind Singh Chandel Order On Board 25/03/2022

1. Heard finally.

2. This acquittal appeal has been filed against the judgment and order of

acquittal dated 21.08.2004 passed in Criminal Case No.802 of 2003 by the

learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bilaspur, C.G., whereby, the

learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bilaspur acquitted the

respondents-accused from the offence punishable under Section 498(A)/34 of

IPC.

3. During the course of argument, it is submitted by learned counsel for the

respondents that as the acquittal of respondents has been passed by the

learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, therefore, as per the provision

contained in Section 378(1)(a) of Cr.P.C., the appeal may be filed before the

Sessions Court and not before this Court. Therefore, this appeal is not

maintainable.

4. Considering the fact that the order of acquittal has been passed by the

Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bilaspur, the appeal may be preferred

before the Sessions Court as provision contained in Section 378(1)(a) of

Cr.P.C., thus, this appeal is not maintainable.

5. Accordingly, this appeal is dismissed.

Sd/-

(Arvind Singh Chandel) Judge

Ravi