Allow Cookies!
By using our website, you agree to the use of cookies
Hon’ble Smt. Justice Rajani Dubey of Chhattisgarh High Court on 27/09/2019 passed an Order in the matter of Pawan Kumar Tiwari & Others v. State of Chhattisgarh & Others which stated that revision against the acquittal by the victim is not maintainable.
Complainant (Applicant) has filed an FIR on 08/02/2012 against the Accused (Respondents) on the ground that on 08/02/2012 at about 2.30 p.m all the respondents have entered his room at D.P. Vipra College, Bilaspur and abused him, threatened him and tried to interfere in his work. The applicant filed a report against all the respondents at Police Station City Kotwali who registered offense under Sections 147, 294 and 506 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 and after investigation, the charge sheet was filed against the respondents and charges were framed. The prosecution has examined 4 witnesses in their support and also the statement of the accused was recorded under section 313 of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 in which they have denied all the charges against them and pleaded innocence. After the hearing, the trial court acquitted all the accused from the charges of Section 147 and 506 of IPC and only convicted them under section 294 of IPC and sentenced with a fined of Rs. 500. Accused appealed against the order and learned court also acquitted them under section 294 of IPC.
The Petitioner submitted that the matter demanded a stern approach as the accused-respondent was a professor at an educational institution who entered the victim's room and abused him. He further submitted that when the culprits are the persons imparting the education the matter should be looked into with all seriousness and in the present case the adoption of such serious approach is absent and therefore invocation of appropriate jurisdiction by this court is called for. While learned counsel for the respondent submitted that the revision against the acquittal order by the victim is not maintainable and the appellant ought to have filed an appeal under section 372 of CrPC.
Convinced by the arguments of the respondent, the court dismissed the petition of the applicant by saying that the revision against acquittal by the victim is not maintainable. Court cited that section 401(4) prescribed that “where under this Code an appeal lies and no appeal is brought, no proceeding by way of revision shall be entertained at the instance of the party who could have appealed.” Court further makes a reference of Hon’ble Supreme Court's verdict in Mallikarjun Kidagali v. State of Karnataka & Others[1], wherein it was held that “on the basis of the plain language of the law and also as interpreted by several High Courts and in addition the resolution of the General Assembly of the United Nation, it is quite clear to us that a victim as defined in Section 2(wa) of the CrPC would be entitled to file an appeal before the court to which an appeal ordinarily lies against the order of conviction.”
However, the court granted liberty to the Petitioner to file a special leave to appeal along with an appeal against the judgment of acquittal.
[1] (2019) 2 SCC 752
86540
103860
630
114
59824