Dismissed

Kanti Devi v. The State of Bihar and Ors.

Patna HC18 Dec 2023CR. REV./190/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Held not maintainable. The High Court held that a revision by a defecto complainant for sentence enhancement or acquittal is not permissible under Section 372 Cr.P.C. when the accused has been acquitted, denying the statutory right of appeal reserved for the victim.

What did the court decide?

Revisional application disposed of; no steps allowed for enhancement of sentence or setting aside acquittal.

Kanti Devi Vs The State of Bihar and Ors. — Writ and Judicial Review | Patna HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL REVISION No.190 of 2019

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-72 Year-2013 Thana- JANTA BAZAR District- Saran

¶3

======================================================

¶4

KANTI DEVI Wife of Late Ram Raj Sharma Resident of Village- Harpur Kothi, P.S.- Janta Bazar, District- Saran.

¶5

... ... Petitioner/s

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Bihar

¶8

Brij Kishor Sharma Son of Raghunath Sharma Resident of Village- Harpur Kothi, P.S.- Janta Bazar, District- Saran.

¶9

Raghunath Sharma Son of Jokhan Sharma Resident of Village- Harpur Kothi, P.S.- Janta Bazar, District- Saran.

¶10

Mit Kishor Sharma Son of Raghunath Sharma Resident of Village- Harpur Kothi, P.S.- Janta Bazar, District- Saran.

¶11

Kaushalya Devi @ Kailasho Devi Wife of Raghunath Sharma Resident of Village- Harpur Kothi, P.S.- Janta Bazar, District- Saran.

¶12

... ... Respondent/s

¶13

======================================================

¶14

Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Umesh Kumar Mishra, Adv. For the Respondent/s : Mr.Anand Kishore Choudhary, APP

¶15

======================================================

¶16

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIBEK CHAUDHURI ORAL ORDER

¶17

8 18-12-2023

¶18

Heard learned Advocate for the petitioner as well as

¶19

learned APP for the State.

¶20

The instant revision is directed against an order of conviction and sentence dated 19.12.2018, under Sections 304 Part-II of the I.P.C., though the charge was framed under Section 302 of the I.P.C., as well as against acquittal of four persons in spite of there being cogent and material evidence against them, in Sessions Trial No. 81 of 2014 (C.I.S. No. 592 of 2015) by the learned Additional District & Sessions Judge-

¶21

Patna High Court CR. REV. No.190 of 2019(8) dt.18-12-2023 2/2

¶22

IX, Saran at Chapra.

¶23

The instant revision for enhancement of sentence as

¶24

well as against the order of acquittal is not maintainable in view of proviso to Section 372 of the Cr.P.C.

¶25

The provision runs thus:-

¶26

“Provided that victim shall have the right to prefer an appeal against any order passed by the Court acquitting the accused or convicting for a lesser offence or imposing inadequate compensation, and such appeal shall lie to the Court to which an appeal ordinarily lies against the order of such Court.”

¶27

Since right of appeal is a statutory and substantive right of the defecto complainant/victim, the instant revision shall not lie. However, the petitioner is at liberty to take steps in accordance with law against the impugned Judgment.

¶28

The revisional application is thus disposed of.

¶29

(Bibek Chaudhuri, J)

¶30

pravinkumar/-

¶31

U T

Kanti Devi v. The State of Bihar and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kanti Devi v. The State of Bihar and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dilip Kumar Vs The State Of Bihar and Anr.

Sanju Devi @ Sanju Kumari Vs The State of Bihar and Ors.

Smita Srivastava Vs the State of Bihar and Anr.

Heera Lal Sahni Vs Seema Devi

Surya Sah @ Suraj Sah Vs The State of Bihar

Binita Devi Vs Pankaj Kumar