Billu Singh Rathore vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2022 Latest Caselaw 2528 MP

                                                                      1
                                     IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR
                                                                   BEFORE
                                                 HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR PALIWAL
                                                           ON THE 23rd OF FEBRUARY, 2022

                                                      CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 6138 of 2021

                                           Between:-
                                           BILLU SINGH RATHORE S/O DEOLAL , AGED
                                           ABOUT 72 YEARS, OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURIST
                                           R/O VILLAGE KHAMHA P.S. AND DISTT. DINDORI
                                           M.P. (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                                   .....APPELLANT
                                           (BY SHRI UMA SHANKAR JAYASWAL, ADVOCATE)

                                           AND

                                1.         THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THR. P.S.
                                           DINDORI DISTT. DINDORI (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                2.         HARI SINGH S/O PHOOL CHAND RATHORE , AGED
                                           ABOUT 45 YEARS, VILLAGE KHAMHA PS DINDORI
                                           (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                3.         NARAYAN SINGH S/O PHOOL CHAND RATHORE ,
                                           AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, VILLAGE KHAMHA PS
                                           DINDORI (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                4.         RAMSEVAK S/O GULAB SINGH RATHORE , AGED
                                           ABOUT 32 YEARS, VILLAGE KHAMHA PS DINDORI
                                           (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                                .....RESPONDENTS
                                           (RESPONDENT NO.1/STATE BY SHRI D. K. PAROHA, GOVERNMENT
                                           ADVOCATE)

                                         T h is appeal coming on for admission this day, the court passed the
                                following:
                                                                       ORDER

Record of the trial Court perused.

This appeal has been filed under Section 372 of Cr.P.C. against the judgment and order of acquittal dated 15.07.2021 by learned JMFC, Dindori, District Dindori (M.P.) whereby learned JMFC has acquitted the respondent nos.2 to 4/accused from commission of offence under Sections 294, 323/34, 506-II of I.P.C.

The proviso to Section 372 of Cr.P.C. read as under:

372. No appeal to lie unless otherwise provided.- No appeal shall lie from Signature Not Verified SAN

Digitally signed by BIJU BABY Date: 2022.02.28 18:54:42 IST 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 indequate compensation, and such appeal shall lie to the

Court to which an appeal ordinarily lies against the order of conviction of such Court.

The language of the proviso to Section 372 of the Cr.P.C. is quite clear. It is clear that there is no provision for any appeal to the High Court against the orders/judgments of conviction and acquittal passed by the Magistrate in a case lodged or registered on the basis of an FIR. The appeal arising out of original judgments/orders of acquittal or of conviction for lesser offence or imposing inadequate compensation passed by the Magistrate shall lie to the Court of Session in view of the proviso to Section 372 of the Cr.P.C. As per Section 374(3), any person 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 sentenced under Section 325, or in respect of whom an order has been made or a sentence has been passed under section 360 by any Magistrate, the appeal lies to the Court of Session.

In the case in hand, the victim lodged FIR against the respondent nos.2 to 4/accused for uttering filthy words in public place and for voluntarily causing simple hurt and criminal intimidation. The FIR was lodged in P.S. Dindori and charge sheet was filed by the police. After trial, learned JMFC acquitted the accused persons. In such cases, the appeal is not required to be filed under Section 378 of Cr.P.C. but as per the proviso to Section 372 of Cr.P.C. Such appeal shall lie to the Court to which an appeal ordinarily lies against the order of conviction to such Court i.e. Court of Session and not the High Court. Only in case of complaint defined in Section 2(d) of the Cr.P.C. where allegations were made orally or in writing to a Magistrate in that case only, in case of acquittal the appeal shall lie before the High Court under Section 378(4) of Cr.P.C.

Signature Not Verified In view of above discussion, this appeal filed by the victim against SAN

Digitally signed by BIJU BABY judgment/order of acquittal passed by Magistrate in a criminal case is not Date: 2022.02.28 18:54:42 IST

maintainable before the High Court.

Accordingly, this appeal being not maintainable, is dismissed.

(DINESH KUMAR PALIWAL) JUDGE b

Signature Not Verified SAN

Digitally signed by BIJU BABY Date: 2022.02.28 18:54:42 IST