<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2010 (10) TMI 1244 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=307613</link>
    <description>The proviso to Section 372 of the Code of Criminal Procedure creates an additional substantive right for a victim, including a complainant who is also the victim, to appeal against acquittal, conviction for a lesser offence, or inadequate compensation before the court where an appeal ordinarily lies against conviction. Read harmoniously with Section 378(4), it does not displace the separate route for State or complainant appeals to the High Court with leave. However, because the amendment took effect on 31.12.2009, appeals filed in the Sessions Court before that date were not maintainable there and remained governed by the earlier remedy under Section 378(4).</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 21 Oct 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 25 Apr 2023 12:05:23 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=711738" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (10) TMI 1244 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=307613</link>
      <description>The proviso to Section 372 of the Code of Criminal Procedure creates an additional substantive right for a victim, including a complainant who is also the victim, to appeal against acquittal, conviction for a lesser offence, or inadequate compensation before the court where an appeal ordinarily lies against conviction. Read harmoniously with Section 378(4), it does not displace the separate route for State or complainant appeals to the High Court with leave. However, because the amendment took effect on 31.12.2009, appeals filed in the Sessions Court before that date were not maintainable there and remained governed by the earlier remedy under Section 378(4).</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 21 Oct 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=307613</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>