Usually, when an accused is acquitted then State files an appeal against the acquittal. Now, besides the State, a victim can also file an appeal. A victim can also appeal against the acquittal as per Section 372, Cr.P.C.
In Mallikarjun Kodagali (Dead) Through Legal Representatives v. The State Of Karnataka, the Apex Court noted that victim of a crime has to go through the trauma of crime and it does not stop there. The victim faces difficulties even when lodging an FIR and this difficulty continues even during trial. Rewinding the whole ordeal by a victim, again and again, is traumatic for the victim especially for those victims of sexual offences. The court while considering this case felt that compensating a victim of crime is not adequate.
In this case, the deceased appellant was a victim of a crime and
he lodged an FIR. The Trial Court had acquitted the accused and so the
appellant filed an appeal under Section 372, Cr.P.C.before High Court and the
court held that it was not maintainable. So, another appeal was filed under
Section 378(4), Cr.P.C. before the High Court where the court held the appeal
was not maintainable. Challenging the order, an appeal was made before the top
Court and the court noted
The correct position in law would be that the right to
file an appeal by the victim of an offence is an independent and statutory
right not subservient to the rights of the State to file an appeal. It was
further concluded that each victim has an independent right of appeal and in a
given case, the grievance of different victims may be completely different. It
was held as follows:
“In our opinion, the correct law, as emerging from the scheme of
the Code, would be that the right of a victim to prefer an appeal (on limited
grounds enumerated in proviso to Sec. 372 of the Code) is a separate and
independent statutory right and is not dependent either upon or is subservient
to right of appeal of the State. In other words, both the victim and the
State/prosecution can file appeals independently without being dependent on the
exercise of the right by the other. Moreover, from the act or omission for
which the accused has been charged, there may be more than one victim and the
loss suffered by the victims may vary from one victim to the other victims.
Therefore, each of such victims will have separate right of appeal and in such
appeals, the grievance of each of the appellant may be different. For instance,
in an act of arson when a joint property of different persons has been set on
fire, the loss suffered by each of the co-sharers may be different. In such a
case, each co-sharer has a separate right of appeal and such right of one does
not depend even on the filing of such appeal by another victim.
0 comments:
Post a Comment
Thanks