Petitioner challenged an appellate acquittal via Criminal Revision. Court held revision not maintainable against acquittal orders as only appeal lies under Section 378(4) Cr.P.C., dismissing the petition.
Petition dismissed for lack of maintainability.
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.
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA
CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.400 of 2004
JUDGMENT:
The petitioner herein- the de facto complainant, is the wife of the first respondent and she gave a report to Gatkeswar Police Station alleging harassment for dowry against her husband, her in-laws and others and on the basis of it, a case was registered and after investigation, the charge sheet was filed. The learned Special Judicial First Class Magistrate for Prohibition and Excise Cases, Ranga Reddy District, has taken the same on his file as C.C.No.268 of 2002 for the offence punishable under Section 498-A IPC. During the course of trial, on behalf of the prosecution, the petitioner got herself examined as P.W.1 and five more witnesses i.e., P.Ws.2 to 6 were examined and Exs.P-1 and P-2 were marked. On behalf of the accused, none was examined nor any document was marked. The learned Magistrate having analysed the entire evidence on record, found the husband-A-1 alone guilty of the said offence and accordingly, sentenced him to suffer simple imprisonment for a period of six months and to pay a fine of Rs.500/-, in default, to suffer simple imprisonment for a period of one month. The said judgment, dated 29.07.2003, was questioned by the petitioner herein-A-1 by filing Criminal Appeal No.4 of 2003 on the file of the IV Additional District and Sessions Judge, (Fast Track Court), Ranga Reddy District at L.B.Nagar, who by his judgment, dated 23.12.2003, allowed the said appeal, setting aside the judgment of the trial Court and accordingly, acquitting the first respondent
herein-Accused No.1. Challenging the same, the wife filed the present Criminal Revision Case.
The impugned judgment, for all purposes, is an order of acquittal of the accused. As against the order of acquittal, Criminal Appeal, as provided for under Section 378 (4) Cr.P.C., is maintainable, but not the Criminal Revision Case under Sections 397 and 401 Cr.P.C. Hence, the present Criminal Revision Case is not maintainable and the same is accordingly dismissed.
___________________________________ JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA
20th January 2011 DR
1 issue framed by the court
Whether a Criminal Revision under Sections 397/401 Cr.P.C. is maintainable against an order of acquittal under Section 378(4) Cr.P.C.
Wife
Husband
GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
