The appeal against enhancement of sentence was dismissed as not maintainable under Section 372 Cr.P.C., as the victim lacks a right to appeal for sentence enhancement, and the appeal for compensation was not dealt with in this judgment.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Cra1042.15In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh
Criminal Appeal No.S-1042-SB of 2015
Date of decision:12.2.2016
Ravinder Kumar
...Appellant
v.
State of Haryana and others
...Respondents
Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Inderjit Singh
.....
Present: Mr. J.P. Sharma, Advocate for the appellant.
Mr. D.R. Singla, Deputy Advocate General, Haryana for the respondent-State.
Mr. Zorawar Singh, Advocate for Mr. N.S. Shekhawat, Advocate for respondents No.2 to 5.
Inderjit Singh, J.
This criminal appeal has been filed by Ravinder Kumarappellant for enhancement of the sentence and for grant of compensation.
Notice of motion was only issued regarding grant of compensation and the appeal regarding enhancement of sentence was dismissed by this Court vide order dated 29.9.2015 as per proviso attached to Section 372 Cr.P.C., which is as under:-
“ 372. No appeal to lie unless otherwise provided:- No appeal shall lie from any judgment or order of a Criminal Court except as provided for by this Code or by any other law for the time
HARPAL SINGH PARMAR 2016.03.10 15:41 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh
Cr. Appeal No.S-1042-SB of 2015
[2]
being in force:
Provided that the victim shall have a 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 conviction of such Court.”
In view of the proviso attached to Section 372 Cr.P.C., no appeal for enhancement of sentence is maintainable by the victim. Therefore, the same was dismissed.
A perusal of the above proviso also shows that the appeal under Section 372 Cr.P.C. by the victim is maintainable only for enhancement of the compensation and not for the grant of compensation.
In the present case, it is argued that no compensation has been granted by the trial Court. Therefore, when the compensation has not been granted, there is no ground for filing the appeal for enhancement of the same on the ground of inadequate compensation. It is also held by the Division Bench of this Court in Raj Singh and others v. State of Punjab and others, (CRA-D-779-DB of 2014, decided on 02.09.2014).
Therefore, in view of the law laid down by the Division Bench of this Court in the above mentioned case, this appeal is not maintainable. Hence the criminal appeal is dismissed.
February 12, 2016. (Inderjit Singh)
hsp
HARPAL SINGH PARMAR 2016.03.10 15:41 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh
2 issues framed by the court
Whether an appeal for enhancement of sentence is maintainable by the accused under Section 372 Cr.P.C.
Whether compensation not being granted by the trial Court constitutes grounds for filing an appeal for enhancement of compensation.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Raj Singh and others v. State of Punjab and othersRelied on¶25
Raj Singh and others v. State of Punjab and others, (CRA-D-779-DB of 2014, decided on 02.09.2014)
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Ravinder Kumar
State of Haryana
Inderjit Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
