1980 (10) TMI 213 - HC - Indian Laws

Judgment Defines Corporate Bodies as Non-Public Servants, Highlights Appeal Time Limits in Acquittal Cases per CrPC Sec. 378(5.

The judgment clarifies that appeals in acquittal cases must adhere to the time limits specified in Section 378(5) CrPC, distinguishing between public ... - Issues:1. Interpretation of the time limitation for filing an appeal in a case of acquittal.2. Determination of the complainant in a criminal case involving a corporate body.3. Application of the concept of legal immortality to a corporate body in legal proceedings.4. Analysis of whether a corporate body can be considered a public servant under the Indian Penal Code.Analysis:1. The judgment addresses the issue of the time limitation for filing an appeal in cases of acquittal. It highlights the provision under Section 378(5) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, which specifies different time limits based on whether the complainant is a public servant or not. The judgment emphasizes that the appeal must be filed within the prescribed time frame to be entertained by the High Court.2. The judgment delves into the determination of the complainant in a criminal case involving a corporate body. It references a Supreme Court ruling that clarifies that even if a prosecutor files a complaint on behalf of a corporate body, the corporate body is considered the complainant in the eyes of the law. In this case, the Municipal Corporation of Delhi was deemed the complainant, not the individual prosecutor.3. The judgment explores the application of the concept of legal immortality to a corporate body in legal proceedings. It explains that a corporate body, such as the Municipal Corporation of Delhi, enjoys legal immortality, perpetual succession, and the capacity to sue and be sued in its own name. This legal status distinguishes a corporation from individual entities in legal matters.4. The judgment analyzes whether a corporate body can be classified as a public servant under the Indian Penal Code. It asserts that a corporation, being a legal entity, cannot be considered a public servant as defined in Section 21 of the Indian Penal Code. While the agents of a corporation may qualify as public servants, the corporate body itself is an artificial entity without physical existence or human attributes.Overall, the judgment clarifies the legal principles surrounding the filing of appeals in cases of acquittal, the status of a corporate body as a complainant in criminal proceedings, the legal attributes of a corporate entity, and the distinction between a corporate body and a public servant under the Indian Penal Code.