Allowed¶18

Madhuri Mallick v. Radhakrushna Mallick

Criminal Law – Appeal against acquittal – Right of victim

Orissa HC7 Nov 2025CRLLP/121/2010

Download

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Victim-informant's application for leave under S.378(3) CrPC to appeal against acquittal dated 02.08.2010 in Session Trial No.106/139 of 2008 (Ss.376/417 IPC, Adhoc Additional Sessions Judge, FTC-II Balasore); proviso to S.372 CrPC (Amendment Act 5 of 2009, w.e.f. 31.12.2009) gives victim direct right of appeal against acquittal; leave under S.378 CrPC not required for victim's appeal; Registry to convert CRLLP to criminal appeal and place before assigned bench. Coram: Aditya Kumar Mohapatra, J. Decision date: 07.11.2025.

What did the court decide?

Registry directed to convert the present application into a criminal appeal and place the matter before the appropriate assigned bench expeditiously. ¶18

Madhuri Mallick Vs Radhakrushna Mallick — Orissa HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK CRLLP No.121 of 2010

¶2

Madhuri Mallick ..... Petitioner

¶3

Represented By Adv. - M/s.pravash Ch.jena

¶4

-versus-

¶5

Radhakrushna Mallick & Ors.

¶6

..... Opposite Parties Represented By Adv. -

¶7

CORAM:

¶8

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR MOHAPATRA

ORDER

07.11.2025

Order No.

1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual/ Physical Mode).

¶13

Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner.

¶14

The present application has been filed at the instance of the informant-victim under Section 378(3) of the Cr.P.C. seeking leave to prefer an appeal against the judgment of acquittal dated 02.08.2010 passed in session Trial No.106/139 of 2008 by the learned Adhoc Additional Sessions Judge (F.T.C.-II), Balasore thereby acquitting the accused-Opposite Parties of the charges under Sections 376/417 of the I.P.C. On perusal of the record it appears that no leave application has been filed at the instance of the State seeking leave to prefer a government appeal.

¶15

On a careful consideration of the factual background of the present case this Court observed that the Petitioner who was the victim-informant before the trial court, being aggrieved by the judgment of acquittal of the learned trial court dated 02.08.2010, has

¶16

Page 1 of 2.

¶17

approached this Court by filing this application seeking leave to prefer an appeal. It is not disputed that the Petitioner is a victim and she was informant to the present case. Moreover, the allegation made in the F.I.R. was heinous in nature i.e. involving the offence under Section 376 of the I.P.C. So far as Section 372 of the Cr.P.C. is concerned, it was amended in the year 2009 and the amendment came into effect on 31.12.2009 by Amendment Act 5 of 2009 by introducing a new proviso to the said section. The newly added proviso provides for a right to the victim to prefer an appeal against any order of acquittal and such appeal shall lie to the Court to which an appeal could ordinarily lie against an order of conviction of such Court. Since against the judgment of acquittal in the present case an appeal would have lied to this Court had the accused been convicted, there is no dispute with regard to the proposition that the appeal would lie to this Court in view of the specific provision contained in the proviso to Section 372 of the Cr.P.C. conferring a right on the victim to prefer an appeal directly to this Court. Therefore, this Court is of the considered view that no leave is required under Section 378 Cr.P.C. to prefer an appeal by the victim.

¶18

In view of the aforesaid legal position Registry is directed to convert the present application to that of a criminal appeal and that the matter be placed before the appropriate assigned bench expeditiously.

¶19

( Aditya Kumar Mohapatra) Judge

¶20

Rubi

¶21

Digitally Signed Signed by: RUBI BEHERA Reason: Authentication Location: OHC Date: 11-Nov-2025 14:02:17

¶22

Page 2 of 2.

¶23

Signature Not Verified

Madhuri Mallick v. Radhakrushna Mallick

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Madhuri Mallick v. Radhakrushna Mallick

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

State of Orissa Vs Raghunath Pradhan

Tapas Kumar Dash Vs Arindum Dash

Sudhansu Kumar Sahu Vs State of Odisha

Saudamini Mohanty Vs Gita Pattnaik

Ganesh Pr.Agrawalla Vs Manoj Ku.Patra

K.Venugopal Vs P.Rajendra Prasad