Special Appeal Maintainable If Single Judge's Order Relates To Authority Acting Without Statutory Appellate Jurisdiction: Allahabad High Court Recall Of Witness For Cross-Examination Permissible On Newly Framed Issue Post-Remand Even If Disposal Timeline Is Fixed: Karnataka High Court Litigant Cannot Overcome Law Of Limitation By Shifting Blame On Counsel Through Inconsistent Stands: Madras High Court Cross-Cases Cannot Be Clubbed If Co-Accused In Complaint Case Is Absconding & Complainant Delayed Process: Allahabad High Court Preventive Detention Not Warranted If Person Can Be Dealt With Under Ordinary Laws; No Effort To Arrest In Pending Cases: Supreme Court Writ Petition Cannot Be Dismissed On ‘Forum Non Conveniens’ If Respondent's Office Is Within Court's Jurisdiction: Supreme Court Supreme Court Doubts 'Sajjan Singh' Ruling; Refers To Larger Bench Whether Third Judge Can Re-examine Unanimous Findings Under Section 392 CrPC SARFAESI Sale Vitiated If Balance 75% Bid Amount Is Paid Beyond 15 Days Without Written Extension Agreement: Supreme Court Delhi High Court Can't Refuse Writ Petition Against BSF Dismissal Merely Because Cause Of Action Arose Outside Delhi: Supreme Court Private Rights Must Yield To Public Interest: Andhra Pradesh High Court Directs Removal Of Encroachments On Public Road Review Jurisdiction Cannot Be Invoked To Re-Agitate Factual Disputes Or Seek Re-Hearing On Merits: Allahabad High Court Recovery Under Section 27 Evidence Act Vitiated If Police Already Present At Spot Before Arrival Of Panch Witnesses: Bombay High Court Mere Non-Compliance Or Delay In Procedure Under Section 52A NDPS Act Is An Irregularity, Not An Illegality Entitling Accused To Bail: Calcutta High Court Recovery Of Weapon Used In Commission Of Offence Not A Sine Qua Non For Conviction If Ocular Evidence Is Corroborated: Allahabad High Court Seized Vehicles Shouldn't Be Kept Idle To Rot In Police Stations, Utility Vanishes Due To Stagnation: Karnataka High Court Or 39 CPC | Trial Court Erred In Dismissing Injunction Application Despite Respondent's 'No Objection' To Restraining Share Transfer: Gauhati High Court Issuing NBW Merely For Absence Of Accused Already On Bail Is Improper; Liberty Cannot Be Dealt With Lightly: Orissa High Court 138 NI | Expert Examination Of Disputed Documents Essential For Just Adjudication If Complainant Denies Handwriting & Signatures: Rajasthan High Court Order 41 Rule 27 CPC Cannot Be Invoked To Fill Lacunae In Evidence If Party Voluntarily Closed Evidence In Trial Court: Delhi 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