Disposed¶19

Ram Briksh Chouhan v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC20 Jul 2026Acq. App.(C)/7/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Jharkhand High Court, Ranchi; Acquittal Appeal (C) No.07 of 2024; Rajesh Kumar, J.; order dated 20.07.2026; maintainability of appeal against JM acquittal; Section 372 Cr.P.C.; Celestium Financial v. A. Gnanasekaran, 2025 SCC OnLine SC 1320; appeal to lie before Sessions Court; withdrawal with liberty; Section 403 IPC acquittal (Dhanbad, C.P. Case No.46 of 2009); I.A. Nos.6541 & 6538 of 2024 disposed.

What did the court decide?

Appeal disposed of as withdrawn with liberty to approach the next appellate forum (Sessions Court); pending interlocutory applications I.A. Nos.6541 of 2024 and 6538 of 2024 disposed of. ¶19

Ram Briksh Chouhan Vs the State of Jharkhand — Jharkhand HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

2026:JHHC:21372

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Acquittal Appeal (C) No.07 of 2024

¶3

[Against the Judgment of acquittal dated 01.03.2019, passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, 1^st Class, Dhanbad in C.P. Case No.46 of 2009, T.R. No.1006/ 2019]

¶4

Ram Briksh Chouhan aged about 59 years Son of Mania Beldar @ Maina Chouhan, resident of Sahana Pahadi, P.O & P.S. Jharia, District - Dhanbad. ….. Appellant

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State of Jharkhand.

¶7

Munilal Beldar S/O Late Punit Beldar, resident of Sahana Pahadi, P.O. & P.S. Jharia, District – Dhanbad.

¶8

..... Respondents

¶9

PRESENT

¶10

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR --------- For Appellant : Mr. Saibal Kr. Laik, Advocate For the State : Mr. Pankaj Kumar, P.P For the Resp. No.2 : Mr. Abhijeet Kr. Singh, Advocate ---------

¶11

Order No.08/ Dated: 20th July, 2026

¶12

1. The present acquittal appeal has been filed against the judgment dated 01.03.2019 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, 1^st Class, Dhanbad in C.P. Case No.46 of 2099, T.R. No.1006/ 2019, whereby the learned Trial Court has acquitted the respondent no.2 herein from the charge under Section 403 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶13

2. In view of the judgment passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Celestium Financial Vs. A. Gnanasekaran Etc., reported in 2025 SCC OnLine SC 1320 and considering the clear provision of Section 372 of the Cr.P.C., the appeal against the judgment of acquittal, passed by the Judicial Magistrate, will lie before the court below itself i.e. the Sessions Court. Paragraph No.6.1 of the

¶14

- 1 - Acq. Appeal (C) No.07 of 2024

¶15

2026:JHHC:21372

¶16

said judgment is relevant which reads as under:

¶17

“6.1. Chapter XXIX of the CrPC deals with appeals. The said Chapter delineates the statutory framework governing appeals. Section 372 unequivocally declares that no appeal shall lie from any judgment or order of a criminal court except as provided for by the CrPC itself or by any other law for the time being in force. In fact, Section 372 of the CrPC speaks of an embargo on the filing of an appeal from any judgment or order of a criminal court except as provided for by the CrPC or by any other law for the time being in force. Section 372 is couched in a negative language and it states that no appeal shall lie from any judgment or order of a criminal court except as provided for by the CrPC or by any other law for the time being in force. Section 372 is a preface to the chapter on appeals which in substance states that appeal can be filed only in accordance with what has been stated in the provisions to follow Section 372. The proviso was introduced to Section 372 by the Code of Criminal Procedure (Amendment) Act, 2008 (Act 5 of 2009), which came into effect from 31.12.2009. By virtue of this amendment, a limited right of appeal has been conferred upon the victim of an offence. On a reading of the proviso to Section 372, it is apparent that a victim shall have a right to prefer an appeal against: (i) any order passed by the court acquitting the accused or (ii) convicting for a lesser offence or (iii) imposing inadequate compensation. Such appeal shall lie to the court to which an appeal ordinarily lies against the order of conviction of such court. In fact, with effect from 31.12.2009 when clause (wa) to Section 2 was inserted to the definition of victim, proviso to Section 24 was also added which provides that the Court may permit the victim to engage an advocate of his choice to assist the prosecution under the said sub-section.”

¶18

3. In that view of the matter, learned counsel for the appellant has sought permission for withdrawal of the appeal with a liberty to approach the next appellate forum in the Civil Court.

¶19

4. With the aforesaid liberty, the present appeal stands disposed of as withdrawn.

¶20

5. Pending interlocutory applications being I.A. Nos.6541 of 2024 and 6538 of 2024, stand disposed of.

¶21

(Rajesh Kumar, J.)

¶22

Jharkhand High Court, Ranchi Dated, the 20^th July, 2026 Ravi-Chandan /- NAFR Uploaded on 21.07.2026

¶23

- 2 -

¶24

Acq. Appeal (C) No.07 of 2024

Ram Briksh Chouhan v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ram Briksh Chouhan v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Awadhesh Singh Alias Avdesh Kumar Alias Prashant Ji Vs the State of Jharkhand

Ghanshyam Singh Vs the State of Jharkhand

Ravi Toppo Vs the State of Jharkhand

Sakla Hembram Vs the State of Jharkhand

Kumari Ratnakar @ Ratnakar Kumari Alias Ratnakar Devi Vs State of Jharkhand through Anti -Corruption Bureau

Manoj Bhagat Vs the State of Jharkhand