District Judiciary Retirement Age | Supreme Court Directs Enhancement To 62 Years To Arrest Attrition Of Judicial Talent Slogans Inciting Armed Rebellion Or Challenging Sovereignty Cannot Be Equated With Religious Expressions: Allahabad High Court Denies Bail Revisional Authority Under AP ROR Act Has Jurisdiction To Direct Inquiry Into Illegal Transfers Of Assigned Land: Andhra Pradesh High Court Indian Law Does Not Recognise 'Joint Parenting' As A Statutory Concept; Child Welfare Remains Paramount: Bombay High Court Order 26 Rule 9 CPC | Court Must Appoint Survey-Knowing Commissioner In Suits Alleging Physical Encroachment And Boundary Disputes: Calcutta High Court Section 33-C(2) ID Act | Labour Court Has Jurisdiction To Recover Consequential Benefits Arising From CAT Orders: Delhi High Court Order VIII Rule 1-A(3) CPC | Procedural Law Is Meant For Advancement Of Justice; Technicalities Should Not Scuttle Opportunity To Lead Evidence: Himachal Pradesh High Court High Court Can Condition Condonation Of Delay In Land Acquisition Appeals Upon Waiver Of Interest For Delayed Period: Bombay High Court Employees Compensation Act | Insurance Company Not Liable To Indemnify Penalty Imposed On Employer Under Section 4-A(3)(b): Himachal Pradesh High Court Employees’ Compensation Act | Failure To Frame Issue On Employer-Employee Relationship Vitiates Commissioner’s Award: Kerala High Court Default Bail Under Section 187 BNSS | Period Of Investigation Depends On Substance Of Allegations In FIR, Not Merely Mentioned Sections: Madhya Pradesh High Court SARFAESI Act | Forfeiture Of Earnest Money Deposit Must Be Challenged Under Section 17 Before DRT, Not Via Writ Petition: Kerala High Court

"Kerala High Court Sets Precedent: Victim's Right to Appeal Upheld in Landmark Judgment"

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


Kerala High Court, through the Honorable Justice C.S. Dias, has reaffirmed the rights of victims to appeal in criminal cases, setting a significant precedent in the Indian legal landscape. The judgment, delivered on the 6th of October, 2023, has far-reaching implications for victims seeking justice.

The case, Crl.R.P. No.1703 of 2013, involved a victim, Jyothi, who had filed an appeal under the proviso to Section 372 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC). The appeal was against an order of acquittal related to a case of assault by her husband. However, the appeal faced dismissal for default due to a lack of representation.

Justice C.S. Dias, in his comprehensive ruling, emphasized the importance of the victim's right to appeal against an order of acquittal and the need to ensure that this right is protected. He cited the case of Sobhanakumari K. v. Santhosh @ Pallan Shaji, which clarified that there is no specific time period stipulated for such appeals and that any delay should be explained through an affidavit.

Moreover, Justice Dias highlighted that the law, as laid down in Sobhanakumari.K, obliges the Appellate Court to hear the accused or appoint an Amicus Curiae if the accused is not represented. He cited cases such as K.Muruganandam & Ors v. Deputy Superintendent of Police and Anr and Dhananjay Rai @ Guddu Rai v. State of Bihar, which underscored that appeals should be decided on their merits rather than dismissed for default or non-prosecution.

In his concluding remarks, Justice Dias remarked, "The impugned orders are erroneous, improper, and irregular. Thus, I am inclined to allow the revision petition." The court set aside the orders in Crl.M.P No.2047/2013 and Crl.A No.254/2013, effectively restoring the case to the court's docket.

This judgment is poised to have a significant impact on ensuring victims' access to justice and protecting their right to appeal, even if there are delays in filing appeals. It underscores the judiciary's commitment to upholding the rights of victims and ensuring that their grievances are heard and considered in a fair and just manner.

Case Title: Jyothi v. State of Kerala

Date of Judgment: October 6, 2023

Latest Legal News