Suppression Of Material Facts Regarding Criminal Antecedents Disentitles Accused To Discretionary Relief Of Bail: Orissa High Court Section 311 CrPC | Delay Or Absence Of Examination-In-Chief No Bar To Summon Material Witnesses: Allahabad High Court Revenue Authorities Lack Jurisdiction To Declare Genuineness Of Wills Or Validity Of Settlement Deeds; Parties Must Approach Civil Court: Andhra Pradesh High Court Demand Of Bribe Is Sine Qua Non For Conviction Under PC Act, Mere Recovery Of Tainted Money Not Enough: Bombay High Court 'Promotion Effected Long Ago Not To Be Disturbed': Supreme Court Sets Aside HC Order Quashing 13-Year-Old Promotion; Holds 'Laying Rules' Directory Not Mandatory "Mere Oral Assertion Or 'Data Loss' Letter Not Enough To Prove Driving Licence Validity; Owner Has Strict Duty To Ensure Renewal": Supreme Court Reinstates Insurer's Non-Liability, Applies 'Pay & Recover' Principle "Zero Tolerance To Corruption": Supreme Court Reinstates FIRs Against Karnataka Cops, Slams High Court For 'Mini-Trial' & Exceeding S.482 CrPC Powers ‘Ancillary Services Don't Override Carriage’: Supreme Court Upholds 7.5% Presumptive Income For Cruise Operators Under Section 44B IT Act, Rejects Revenue's Higher Tax Claim Division Bench Refuses To Quash FIR, Holds It Cannot Nullify Single Judge's Final Order Directing Registration Of Case: Allahabad High Court High Court Leave Under Clause XII Doesn't Protect Transferred Suits; Section 16 CPC Strictly Applies To City Civil Court In 'Suits For Land': Bombay High Court Joint Account Holder Who Didn't Sign The Dishonoured Cheque Cannot Be Prosecuted Under Section 138 NI Act: Punjab & Haryana High Court Suits Cannot Be Consolidated If Parties, Properties, And Causes Of Action Are Different: Telangana High Court P&H High Court Halts All Construction In Mohali's Shivalik Foothills Over Failure To Demarcate 'Forest Land', Bars Land Sale No Embargo On Issuing Single Statutory Notice Under Section 138 NI Act For Multiple Dishonoured Cheques: Orissa High Court District Collector Has No Jurisdiction Under CrPC To Order Reopening Of Investigation Or Recall Of Closure Report: Madhya Pradesh High Court No Exclusive Monopoly Over Geographical Term 'Malabar' In Isolation; Protection Limited To Registered Composite Marks: Kerala High Court Person In 'De Facto' Control Is A Promoter Under Companies Act Even If Designated As Professional Director: Karnataka High Court Supreme Court Urges Mandatory Animal Tagging, Strict Enforcement of Gaushala Laws To Tackle Stray Cattle Crisis; Holds Owners Accountable "Don't Render Victims Remediless": Supreme Court Slams High Court For Dismissing Plea Over Stray Bull Death, Awards ₹15 Lakh Compensation Supreme Court Red-Flags 'Unregulated Shadow Work' of Private Investigators, Calls For Legislative Overhaul on Digital Evidence & Privacy Rights 125 CrPC | Wife 'Not Entitled To Interim Maintenance If Adultery Established Ex Facie': Supreme Court Evidence Against Absconder Invalid Without Prior S.299 CrPC Order: SC Acquits Murder Accused Ad Valorem Court Fee Mandatory For Section 54 Appeals Challenging Land Acquisition Awards: Supreme 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