TaxTMI Login
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →Just a moment...
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether, in a complaint case ending in acquittal, the complainant can prefer an appeal under the proviso to Section 372 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 before the Court of Session, or whether the complainant must seek special leave and file an appeal under Section 378(4) of the Code before the High Court.
Analysis: The proviso to Section 372 of the Code confers a right of appeal on the victim against acquittal, conviction for a lesser offence, or inadequate compensation, while Section 378(4) specifically governs acquittal in cases instituted upon complaint and requires an application for special leave to the High Court. The two provisions overlap only in complaint cases where the complainant is also a victim. To avoid making Section 378(4) otiose, the provisions were reconciled by treating Section 378(4) as the special provision for complaint cases and the proviso to Section 372 as the general victim-centric provision. The legislative object of the 2009 amendment was to strengthen victim rights, not to permit a complainant in a complaint case to bypass the special leave requirement and forum prescribed by Section 378(4).
Conclusion: The complainant is not entitled to prefer an appeal under the proviso to Section 372 before the Court of Session against acquittal in a complaint case and must file an appeal under Section 378(4) before the High Court after obtaining special leave.
Ratio Decidendi: In an acquittal arising from a case instituted upon complaint, the specific procedure in Section 378(4) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 prevails over the general victim appeal under the proviso to Section 372, so the complainant must approach the High Court with special leave.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
