Karnataka High Court
Smt Shobha H vs State Of Karnataka on 5 October, 2023
Bench: S Rachaiah
-1-
NC: 2023:KHC:36055
CRL.A No. 1979 of 2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1979 OF 2018 (A)
BETWEEN:
SMT SHOBHA H
W/O K.HARISH
AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS
RESIDING AT NO.31
'VISHNU NILAYA'
4TH 'A' CROSS
3RD 'B' MAIN ROAD,
BRUNDAVANA LAYOUT
PADMANABHANAGARA
SUBRAMANYAPURA
BENGALURU - 560 082.
...APPELLANT
Digitally
signed by N (BY SRI. VIJAY SHETTY B, ADVOCATE)
UMA
Location:
HIGH
COURT OF AND:
KARNATAKA
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA
REP. BY BASAVANAGUDI POLICE STATION
BENGALURU - 560 004.
2. SRI. HARISHA
S/O KRISHNAPPA
AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS
RESIDING AT NO.6/1-1
36TH 'A' CROSS
11TH 'A' MAIN
-2-
NC: 2023:KHC:36055
CRL.A No. 1979 of 2018
4TH 'T' BLOCK
JAYANAGAR,
BENGALURU - 560 041.
3. SMT. DHANALAKSHMI
W/O KRISHNAPPA
AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS
RESIDING AT NO.6/1-1
36TH 'A' CROSS
11TH 'A' MAIN
4TH 'T' BLOCK
JAYANAGAR
BENGALURU - 560 041.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. RAHUL RAI K, HCGP FOR R1;
SRI. R RAJA, ADVOCATE FOR R2 AND R3)
THIS CRL.A. IS FILED U/S.378(4) CR.P.C PRAYING THAT
TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT PASSED BY THE 2ND
ADDITIONAL CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, BENGALURU
IN C.C.NO.8091/2013 DATED 03-08-2017 FOR THE OFFENCES
PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 498(A) R/W SECTION 34 OF
IPC, R/W SECTION 3 AND 4 OF DOWRY PROHIBITION ACT AND
ETC.,
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE
COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
-3-
NC: 2023:KHC:36055
CRL.A No. 1979 of 2018
JUDGMENT
1. The present appeal is filed under Section 378(4) of
the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short 'Cr.P.C.'). The said
provision reads thus:
"378. Appeal in case of acquittal. -
(1) xxx xxx
(2) xxx xxx
(3) xxx xxx
(4) If such an order of acquittal is passed in any case
instituted upon complaint and the High Court, on an
application made to it by the complainant in this
behalf, grants special leave to appeal from the order of
acquittal, the complainant may present such an appeal
to the High Court."
On careful reading of the provision, it appears that, if any order
of acquittal is passed in any case instituted upon complaint,
which means, the complainant in a private complaint lodged
under Section 200 of Cr.P.C. against an order of acquittal, has
to prefer the appeal under this provision.
2. In the present case, the complainant / victim
preferred this appeal as against the acquittal order passed by
the Trial Court which was instituted other than the complaint.
If at all any such appeal is preferred to be filed, the victim /
NC: 2023:KHC:36055
CRL.A No. 1979 of 2018
complainant has to seek remedy by invoking the provision
under Section 372 of Cr.P.C. Section 372 of Cr.P.C. reads
thus:
"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
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.]
On careful reading of the said provision, it makes it clear that
the complainant has to file an appeal as a victim before the
Court where the appeal against conviction ordinarily lies.
3. Considering the said aspect, learned counsel for
appellant herein filed a memo seeking for withdrawal of the
appeal. Accepted the said memo and the same is taken on
record.
NC: 2023:KHC:36055
CRL.A No. 1979 of 2018
4. Hence, I proceed to pass the following:-
ORDER
i) The Criminal Appeal stands dismissed as
withdrawn.
ii) In view of the dismissal of the appeal,
I.A.No.1/2018 and I.A.No.2/2018 do not survive for
consideration and they are disposed of accordingly.
iii) In the meantime, if any application for condonation
of delay is filed before the Trial Court, the Trial
Court is directed to consider the said application
leniently, since the matter involves matrimonial
issues. It is needless to say that, the Hon'ble
Supreme Court has time and again reiterated that
issues like matrimonial issues may be viewed
leniently.
Sd/-
JUDGE
Bss
