TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2014 (8) TMI 1134
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed the appellant herein/accused for the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 and sentenced him to undergo simple imprisonment for six months and to pay a fine of Rs. 10,000/- with a further direction to undergo simple imprisonment for three months in case of default in payment of the fine. As against the above said judgment of the appellate Court, the appellant/accused has preferred Criminal Appeal (MD)No.20 of 2014. 2. The respondent in the said Criminal Appeal, namely, the complainant has chosen to file Criminal Revision Case (MD)No.237 of 2014 under Sections 397 read with 401 Cr.PC complaining that the sentence imposed is inadequate and praying for enhancement of punishment. Both the cases are taken up together and are being disposed of by this common judgment. 3.The arguments advanced by Mr.M.Karunanithi, learned counsel for the appellant in Criminal Appeal (MD)No.20 of 2014 who is the respondent in Criminal Revision Case (MD)No.234 of 2014 (accused) and Mr.P.Ganapathisubramanian, learned counsel for the respondent in the Criminal Appeal/Petitioner in the Criminal Revision Case (complainant) are heard. The materials available on record are also pe....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Procedure providing for appeal. 8.It is also the contention of the learned counsel for the appellant that as per Section 372, if a victim figures as a complainant and he is given a right to challenge the order of acquittal in a case instituted on complaint, it would amount to conferring a double benefit on such a person who figures as victim as well as the complainant, besides making the appeal provisions provided in Section 378 (4) and (5) otiose, ineffective and a dead letter. 9.On the contrary, Mr.P.Ganapathisubramanian, learned counsel for the respondent (complainant) would submit that since the proviso to Section 372 Cr.P.C does not make any distinction between a victim-complainant and a victim in a case instituted on police report, the plain meaning of the term 'victim' should be applied in interpreting the proviso to Section 372 Cr.P.C and that if such a meaning is applied to the term ?victim? found in the proviso to Section 372, the complainant can be construed to be a person on whom such right of appeal has been conferred under the said proviso. 10. This Court paid its anxious considerations to the rival submissions made on both sides. 11.Section 372 of Code of Crimin....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....entertained except with the leave of the High Court. (4) If such an order of' acquittal is passed in any case instituted upon complaint and the High Court, on an application made to it by the complainant in this behalf, grants special leave to appeal from the order of acquittal, the complainant may present such an appeal to the High Court. (5) No application under sub-section (4) for the grant of special leave to appeal from an order of acquittal shall be entertained by the High Court after the expiry of six months, where the complainant is a public servant, and sixty days in every other case, computed from the date of that order of acquittal. (6) If in any case, the application under sub-section (4) for the grant of special leave, to appeal from an order of acquittal is refused, no appeal from that order of acquittal shall lie under sub-section (1) or under sub- section (2). 14. A comparative study of Sections 372 and 378 will make it clear that the learned counsel for the appellant is right in raising a contention that the applicability of Section 372 proviso should be confined to cases not governed by Sections 373 to 383 Cr.P.C. The entire scheme of Code of Criminal P....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....such a conclusion, the Hon'ble Division Bench of the Kerala High Court held that one Section should not be interpreted so as to defeat another provision found in the very same Code. The Hon'ble Division Bench of the Kerala High Court made a clear observation that if the term ?victim? found in Section 372 is given wider meaning to include the complainant also, then it will be destructive of the provision found in Section 378 (4) and (5). It was also commented upon by referring to the language of the main part of Section 372. 17. According to the Hon'ble Division Bench of the Kerala High Court, as contended by the learned counsel for the appellant in the present case, the proviso found in Section 372 should be made applicable only to those cases which are sought to be covered by the main Section of 372. Section 372 is general in its application and it has also been couched in a negative language that no appeal shall lie against any order or judgment unless otherwise provided somewhere else in the Code. Hence, as rightly contended by the learned counsel for the appellant, the scope of Section 372 Cr.P.C should be limited to the cases which are not governed by Sections 373....