Appellate jurisdiction over acquittal appeals cannot be created by participation when statute vests power in another court.

An appeal from acquittal in a complaint case lies to the High Court under Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, subject to the required leave or special leave. If an appellate court entertains such an appeal without jurisdiction, its order cannot be sustained merely because the parties participated in the proceedings. Jurisdiction is a question of law the court must verify before deciding the appeal, and an order made without appellate power is a nullity and unsustainable in law.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appellate court lacked jurisdiction to entertain an appeal against acquittal filed before it instead of before the High Court, and whether the order passed in such appeal was a nullity.

Analysis: The statutory scheme governing appeals from acquittal provides that, in a complaint case, an appeal lies to the High Court under Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, subject to the prescribed leave or special leave requirements. An order passed by a court that has no jurisdiction to entertain the appeal cannot be sustained merely because the parties participated in the proceedings. The existence of jurisdiction is a question of law that the court must verify before proceeding to decide the appeal.

Conclusion: The appeal before the District Court was incompetent, and the judgment rendered therein was a nullity and unsustainable in law.

Ratio Decidendi: An order passed by a court lacking jurisdiction is a nullity, and participation of the parties does not confer jurisdiction where the statute vests appellate power in another court.

---