SYMBIOSIS LAW SCHOOL

LAW OF CRIMES III:

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE

INTERNAL ASSESSMENT 1

SUBMITTED BY-:

NAMAN KHANNA
DIVISION A
17010125053

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE

 SYMBIOSIS LAW SCHOOL

Analyze the concepts of Judgment and Compensation to

victims. Answer with the help of case laws.
JUDGMENT
The judgment is the final decision of the court, given with reasons, on the questions of the
guilt or innocence of the accused person. It includes the court’s decision as to the punishment
the guilty person has to suffer, or as to the conditions subject to which the offender is to be
released without being punished as such.
The word ‘Judgment’ means a judgment of conviction or acquittal, and not an order of the
discharge or the dismissal of a complaint. The judgment must be completely written when it
is pronounced or explained. The law wisely requires that the reasons for the decision shall
accompany the decision and shall not be left to be subsequently inserted or recorded.1
Judgment means an expression of opinion of judge arrived at after due consideration of the
evidence and the arguments. Section 353-362 incorporated in chapter XXVII of the code of
1973 clearly explains the term ‘Judgment”. Judgment is the final reasoned decision of the
Court as to the guilt or innocence of the accused. Where the accused is found guilty, the
judgment must also contain an order requiring the accused to undergo punishment or
treatment. The main features of Judgment are given below:-
1. Judge has to apply his mind to the case.
2. Judgment needs to show that judge has applied his mind to each and every fact and
evidence of the case.
3. Once at conclusion, it is a final decision with respect to conviction or acquittal of the
accused.
4. Judgment must contain concise statement of the case, points of determination,
decision on these points and reasons for such decisions.
The Basic components of a judgment to be delivered by the competent authority have been
incorporated u/s 354 of the code of 1973. It reads as follows:
❖ The Judgment must be in the language of the court as notified by the state
government. Every judgment shall be written in the language of the court.2
❖ Every judgment shall contain the point or points for determination, the decision
thereon and the reasons for the decision.3
❖ According to S. 354(1)(c), every judgment shall specify the offence (if any) of which,
and the section of the Indian Penal Code or other law under which, the accused is
convicted and the punishment to which he is sentenced.
❖ S. 354(1)(d) of the Code of 1973 states that if it be a judgment of acquittal, it shall
state the offence of which the accused is acquitted and direct that he be set at liberty.

1
Commentaries on Code of Criminal Procedure, 2nd Ed., Vol. 2, Law Publishers (India) Private Limited,
Allahabad, 1994, p. 1019
2
S. 354(1)(a), The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
3
S. 354(1)(b), The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE

 SYMBIOSIS LAW SCHOOL

❖ According to S. 354(3) of the Code, when conviction is for an offence punishable

with death sentence or life imprisonment, then judgment shall state reasons for that
and incase of death sentence, special reasons for such sentence should be given.
❖ According to S. 354(5) of the Code, when a person is sentenced to death, the
judgment shall direct that the person be hanged by neck till death.
In Sandesh v. State of Maharashtra4, it was held that despite the paradigm shift in criminal
jurisprudence, the ingredient relating to criminal as well as circumstances of crime have to be
considered by the court at the time of delivery of judgment.
In the case of Ramhit v. Emperor5, it was held that the judgment should indicate a careful
analysis and appraisement of the evidence while reaching the conclusions regarding the proof
of facts.
In the case of State of Punjab v. Jagdev Singh Talwandi6, the Supreme Court has also
directed that all orders passed by the courts should be speaking orders giving reasons for the
decision after noting the point at issue.

COMPENSATION TO VICTIMS.
Compensation to victims of crime and for criminal damage to property, has in recent times
assumed importance and has come to gain approval as one of the most fascinating areas of
the law. Although public compensation for criminal damage is not unknown elsewhere7, in
India it is only in the recent past, that the topic has attracted the attention of the judiciary, the
jurists, and the lawyers alike. At long last, the three important realities that:— (1) the welfare
State has the bounden duty to protect life and property; (2) the victims of crime are also
entitled to claim the benefits of the Welfare State; and (3) that crime being endemic, there
will always be violent expositions of social/individual conflicts and that there will always be
a number of innocent victims of depredations of others—have come to be recognised and
understood in their fullest depth and impact.
In India, the Legislature and the judiciary have taken gradual steps to develop the necessary
principles by which compensation could be paid to the victims of crimes. The legislature has
done it by enacting the different kinds of laws, namely, the General Laws8 and Special Laws.9
The Judiciary through the cases which have been decided by it propounded a set of principles
to provide the remedy of compensation where the law is not adequate to provide a remedy to
the victim of crime.
Thus, Victim compensation is one of the major aspects in reparation of the harm or injury
caused to the victim due to the commission of the crime. Monetary assistance in one-way or
the other always benefits the victims in the mitigation of their sufferings. The renaissance of
the prominence of victims in legal system is however a recent phenomenon.

4
2013 Cr.L.J. SC
5
1934(35) Cr.L.J. 919 All
6
1984(1) SCC 596
7
D.S. Greer and V.A. Mitchell, Compensation for Criminal Damage to Property, SLS Publications 1982.
8
Ss. 357, 357A, 357 B, 357 C, 358, 359 of Code of Criminal Procedure,1973, Constitutional Remedies under
Articles 32 and 226
9
The Probation of Offenders Act, 1958; Motor Vehicle Act, 1988; Workmen Compensation
Act, 1923, Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993 etc

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE

 SYMBIOSIS LAW SCHOOL

PROVISIONS UNDER THE CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE, 1973 FOR VICTIM

COMPENSATION.
It is expedient to discuss the legal position in respect of compensation to the victims of the
offence. Post-independence, the criminal trials were governed by Criminal Procedure Codes
1898 and then by Criminal Procedure Codes of 1973.Till the year 2008, there was a provision
more or less similar in both the codes for compensation to the victims of the offence that is
section 545 in the old Code and section 357 in the new Code.
The provisions relating to compensation to victims of crime are contained in ss.357, 357A,
357 B, 357 C, 358, 359 and 250 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
❖ Section 357 Cr.PC: Order to pay compensation
(1) In case of Conviction and Fine is part of Sentence to Accused
When a Court imposes a sentence of fine or a sentence (including a sentence of death) of
which fine forms a part, the Court may, when passing judgment, order the whole or any part
of the fine recovered to be applied-
(a) Expenses in Prosecution: In covering the expenses properly incurred in the prosecution;
(b) Compensation to Victim: In the payment to any person of compensation for any loss or
injury caused by the offence, when compensation is, in the opinion of the Court, recoverable
by such person in a Civil Court;
(c) Compensation in case of Death: When any person is convicted of any offence for having
caused the death of another person or of having abetted the commission of such an offence,
the fine imposed may be used in paying compensation to the persons who are covered for
relief under the Fatal Accidents Act, 1855 (13 of 1855), entitled to recover damages from the
person sentenced for the loss resulting to them from such death;
(d) Compensation of Victim in other Offense: When any person is convicted of any offence
which includes theft, criminal misappropriation, criminal breach of trust, or cheating, or of
having dishonestly received or retained, or of having voluntarily assisted in disposing of,
stolen property knowing or having reason to believe the same to be stolen, in compensating
any bona fide purchaser of such property for the loss of the same if such property is restored
to the possession of the person entitled thereto.
(2) Payment of Compensation subject to Appeal
If the fine is imposed in a case, which is subject to appeal, no such payment shall be made
before the period allowed for presenting the appeal has elapsed, or, if an appeal be
presented, before the decision of the appeal.
(3) Sentences without Fine
When a Court imposes a sentence, of which fine does not form a part, the Court may, when
passing judgment, order the accused person to pay, by way of compensation, such amount as
may be specified in the order to the person who has suffered any loss or injury by reason
of the act for which the accused person has been so sentenced.
(ii)The Court empowered to impose Compensation

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE

 SYMBIOSIS LAW SCHOOL

The High Court or Court of Session or appellate court, when exercising its powers of revision
may also make an order under aforesaid section. At the time of awarding compensation in
any subsequent civil suit relating to the same matter, the Court shall take into account any
sum paid or recovered as compensation under this section.
❖ New Provision for Victim Compensation
It appears that in order to overcome the situation, a new section 357 A Code of Criminal
Procedure was added in the Code of Criminal Procedure by an amendment in the year 2009.
This was the much-needed relief to the victims of offences and therefore one of the most
progressive legislation in recent times. It reads as-
Section 357A of CrPC- Victim compensation scheme
(1) Scheme for Compensation: Every State Government in co-ordination with the Central
Government shall prepare a scheme for providing funds for the purpose of compensation to
the victim or his dependents who have suffered loss or injury as a result of the crime and who
require rehabilitation. The purpose of preparing the scheme by the state governments in
consultation with the central government was to have uniform schemes of victim
compensation throughout India but this was probably not done while preparing the schemes
and the result is that there is great disparity in compensations to victims in these schemes.
(2) Power to Decide Quantum of Compensation: Whenever a recommendation is made by the
Court for compensation, the District or the State Legal Service Authority, as the case may be,
shall decide the quantum of compensation to be awarded under the scheme aforesaid.
(3) Inadequate Compensation/Compensation in case of Acquittal or Discharge: If the trial
Court, at the conclusion of the trial, is satisfied, that the compensation awarded under section
357 is not adequate for such rehabilitation, or where the cases end in acquittal or discharge
and the victim has to be rehabilitated, it may make recommendation for compensation.
(4) Compensation when Offender is Untraceable: Where the offender is not traced or
identified, but the victim is identified, and where no trial takes place, the victim or his
dependents may make an application to the State or the District Legal Services Authority for
award of compensation which shall be decided after due enquiry award adequate
compensation by completing the enquiry within two months.
(5) Collateral Relief to Victim: The State or the District Legal Services Authority, as the case
may be, to lessen the suffering of the victim, may order for immediate first-aid facility or
medical benefits to be made available free of cost on the certificate of the police officer not
below the rank of the officer in charge of the police station or a Magistrate of the area
concerned, or any other interim relief as the appropriate authority deems fit.
Under this provision 357 A Code of Criminal Procedure, the State is also liable to pay
compensation to the victims of crime apart from the accused under section 357 Code of
Criminal Procedure. There are many situations after the commission of the offences in which
the compensation can be awarded.
o At the conclusion of the trial.
o Inadequate compensation

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE

 SYMBIOSIS LAW SCHOOL

o Accused not traceable or no trial commenced

Earlier under section 357, the compensation was awarded only in the eventuality of the
conviction of the accused but now not only on conviction but also on acquittal or discharge of
the accused or in case of untraced status of the accused, compensation can be granted.10 This
is a positive development that takes into account practical reality of an already crumbling
criminal justice system, which is not in a position to bring to book all offenders. It means that
the new section 357 A Code of Criminal Procedure has substantially widened the scope of
compensating the victims of crimes.

OTHER RELAVANT PROVISIONS.

While discussing the law of victim compensation, it is necessary to also address other aspects
of what would be construed as compensation to the aggrieved. This requires a perusal of
other provisions in the CrPC such as Section 358.
Section 358 addresses an unconventional interpretation11 of who is a ‘victim’ and what
would constitute ‘compensation’ for that purpose. In the context of strictly defining a victim,
the Supreme Court has observed that -
“The term 'Victimization' is defined neither by the Central Act nor by the Bombay Act.
Therefore, the term 'Victimization' has to be given general dictionary meaning. In Concise
Oxford Dictionary, 7th Edn., the term 'Victimization' is defined at Page 1197 as follows :
make a victim; cheat; make suffer by dismissal or other exceptional treatment."12
Section 358 provides for compensation to anyone who would be a victim of an arrest that is
without reason. It states that in such a case, the Magistrate may award compensation to the
extent of ₹1,000/- to the person who is a victim of such an arrest. However, according to this
section, it is necessary for a direct connection to exist between the arrest and the complainant.
In order to attract this provision, the arrest must have been caused by the informant without
any sufficient grounds.
Similarly, Section 359 deals with instances where a complaint for a non-cognizable offence is
made to a court, and the accused is convicted by the court. It provides that a Court of Session,
an Appellate Court, or the High Court while exercising their revisional jurisdiction can order
payment of costs in such situations. In addition to the penalty imposed, the court may also
order the accused to pay to the complainant, either in whole or in part, the cost which is
incurred by the complainant in the prosecution. Further, the court is also empowered to
sentence the accused to a simple imprisonment for a period not more than thirty days in the
event he fails to make the payment.

10
Report of Committee on Reforms of Criminal Justice System, Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India
(2003)Vol.1
11
Robert Ilias- “Victims of The System” ED. 1983 page 24
12
Colour-Chem Ltd. v A.L.Alaspurkar&Ors. (1998) 3 SCC 192.

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE

 SYMBIOSIS LAW SCHOOL

The CrPC also takes into account instances where the accused may be victim to false
allegations. In light of the same, Sections 237 deals with compensation to such peculiar
victims. Section 237 empowers the Court of Session to take cognizance of an office in
accordance with section 199 (2) of the CrPC. Further, according to subsection (3) of the same
provision
“If, in any such case, the court discharges or acquits all or any of the accused and is of
opinion that there was no reasonable cause for making the accusation against them or any of
them, it may, by its order of discharge or acquittal, direct the person against whom the
offence was alleged to have been committed (other than the President, Vice- President or the
Governor of a State or the Administrator of a Union Territory) to show cause why he should
not pay compensation to such accused or to each or any of such accused, when there are
more than one”.

SOME LANDMARK CASE LAWS.

In Sebastian M. Hograj v. Union of India13 when the Army Authorities (21st Sikh Regiment,
PHUNGREI camp) who had taken into custody two persons on 10-3-1982—C. Daniel and C.
Paul —failed to produce them on 12-12-1983 and the CBI also submitted a report that their
efforts to locate them yielded no results and concluded that the said two persons must have
met an unnatural death and that prima facie it would be an offence of murder. The Supreme
Court keeping in view the torture, the agony and the mental oppression through which the
wives of the 2 individuals would have passed through, ordered as a measure of exemplary
costs as is permissible in such an ease, the payment of Rs. 1 lakh to the wives of the said two
persons within a period of four weeks from the date of the order.
In Bhim Singh v. State of Jammu and Kashmir14, where an M.L.A. of the Jammu and
Kashmir was arrested while enroute to the seat of the assembly and was thus deprived of his
constitutional rights under Art. 21 and 22 (2) to attend the Assembly session, the Supreme
Court directed the State of Jammu and Kashmir to pay the petitioner a sum of Rs. 30,000
within two months of the order stating that “in appropriate cases we have the jurisdiction to
compensate the victim by awarding suitable monetary compensation”. The august body also
took the occasion to point out that “the police officers who are the custodians of law and
order should not become depredators of civil liberties and that their duty is to protect and not
to abduct.”
The case of Rudul Sah v. State of Bihar15, gave ample scope for the Supreme Court to
elaborate on the payment of the compensation where the violator of the legal rights of a
citizen happens to be none other than the State or instrumentality of the State itself. Here, the
petitioner was acquitted by the Court of Sessions, Muzaffarpur, Bihar, in 1968 but was
released from jail in 1982 i.e., after more than 14 years after his acquittal on the specious
ground that he was insane. “One of the telling ways in which the violation of that right can
reasonably be prevented and due compliance with the mandate of Art. 21 secured is to mulct
its violators in the payment of monetary compensation. The right to compensation is some
palliative for the unlawful acts of instrumentalities which act in the name of public interest

13
AIR 1984 SC 1026.
14
AIR 1986 SC 494.
15
AIR 1985 SC 1086

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE

 SYMBIOSIS LAW SCHOOL

and which present for their protection the powers of the State as a shield. If civilisation is not
to perish in this country as it has perished in some others too well-known to suffer mention, it
is necessary to educate ourselves into accepting that, respect for the rights of individuals is
the true bastion of democracy. Therefore, the State must repair the damage done by its
officers to the petitioner's rights”.16 Accordingly the Supreme Court directed the State of
Bihar to pay Rs. 30,000 in addition to the sum of Rs. 5,000 already paid by it. The learned
judges also pointed out that this order would not preclude the petitioner from bringing a suit
to recover appropriate damages from the State and its erring officials.

CRITICAL ANALYSIS.
S.357, of the Cr.P.C. is regarded a step forward in legislation as it recognized the philosophy
of compensation helpful for the victim even where no sentence or fine is imposed as per
s.357(3). S.357, Cr.P.C. inter alia, empowers a Criminal Court to award compensation out of
fine imposed as a sentence as well as a specified amount as compensation when fine does not
form part of the sentence imposed on him.17 A glance through the scheme of s.357 shows that
compensation is among the lowest in the list of priorities of our ‘welfare state’. The
framework of the system is such that optimum and substantial justice to the victim gives
unjust relief to the oppressor. Payment of compensation under Probation of Offenders Act,
1958 and Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, are both subject to the court’s discretion but
payment under Code of Criminal Procedure is possible only when the act is both a tort and a
crime. Victim compensation lacks proper motivation. S.357, as it stands today does not
assure speedy or sure relief. Moreover, the trial period is lengthy in India. There are few laws
that provide interim or immediate compensation to victim on the lines of Motor Accidents
claim cases, so as to meet the immediate needs caused due to the loss.18
S.357 is regarded as the ‘offender’s liability.’ State liability does not enter the picture
however desirable it may be as there is no reference to such under the section.19 But emerging
theories of victimology support grants-in-aid by the state to assist the victim. As a welfare
state, the state shall devise means to ensure speedy payment of compensation and should
enact special provision in this direction, either in the existing Code of Criminal Procedure or
through a special piece of legislation.
S.358 of Cr.P.C. is another provision that enables payment of compensation, this is granted
for misuse of the power by the Stats, like compensation for groundless arrest or when a police
force acts contrary to its duties. In such cases, it is for the state to proceed against the erring
officials and realize the amount awarded as compensation.20
These provisions have found less favour in the trial courts as courts feel satisfied by
sentencing offenders only. It means that the courts are offender oriented. Another reason
could be that the recent advancement of victimological knowledge has not flown into the

16
As per Chandrachud, C.J. speaking for a Bench of three Judges.
17
S. 356 (1) and S. 357 (3) of Cr.P.C
18
Nanak Singh v. State of Punjab, 1983 CrLJ (NOC) 232 (P&H)
19
State of Madhya Pradesh v. Mangu, 1995 CrLJ 3852
20
Pramod Padhi v. Lolekha, 1986 CrLJ 1634

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE

 SYMBIOSIS LAW SCHOOL

penological corridors of our Magistrates, despite the law having empowered them to utilise
these provisions.21
It is also notable that courts in India have rarely used these statutory provisions to exercise
their discretionary powers to compensate victims of crime. The Law Commission of India
had an admitted fact that Courts are not particularly liberal in utilising these provisions, but
also observed; it is regrettable that our court do not exercise their statutory powers under this
section as freely and liberally as could be desired.22 The available empirical studies, 23reveals
a very rare use of the legal provisions in awarding compensation and inadequacy of the
compensation awarded. The Supreme Court of India, when recently called upon to decide
legality and propriety of compensation awarded under s.357, Cr.P.C. by Punjab and Haryana
High Court, carried the same impression and appealed to courts in India to exercise their
powers liberally to meet the ends of justice in a better way. It is also to see any reason for the
courts not directing compensation if the accused is in a position to pay it to the entitled
injured persons. It, however, cautioned the courts not to award ‘unduly excessive’
compensation and to first calculate the amount to be awarded and then impose a fine higher
than the compensation.24
The appellate court also asserted that the requirement of social justice demands that heavy
fine should be imposed in lieu of reduction of sentence, compensate the victims of crime. It
becomes clear that in India there is fragmented legal framework of compensation, it neither
mandates the courts to compensate the victims nor creates any legal right in their favour. It is
entirely discretion of the court whether to (i) compensate victims of crime; and (ii) initiate
and move legal machinery to recover the fine, out of which compensation is ordered, or the
specified amount of the compensation from the offender to pay it to the victims of the
offender. The fate of victim of crime is left solely to the sweet will of the court that can or
cannot award any kind of compensation.

CRITICISM

The biggest flaw in the jurisprudence of Section 357 is that it is triggered only upon
successful conviction. It functions on the assumption that the accused must be identified,
prosecuted and convicted. It does not accommodate cases where the person is not pronounced
guilty, or in those cases where Closure Reports or Summary Reports are filed by the Police,
disclosing the commission of the offence, but that such an offence has not been committed by
the accused who is sought to be prosecuted, or that the accused has not yet been identified. In
such instances, the courts cannot rely on Section 357 to order compensation to the victim.
Further, this provision places the entire onus of disbursement of compensation on the
convicted person in which case, the quantum of compensation awarded to victim depends on
the financial position of the convict, as opposed to dividing the liability between the State and
the offender where the victim will enjoy the security of compensation

21
Chokalingam K., “Readings in Victimology,” Indian Journal of Criminology, 72, Vol. 21 No. 2 (1985).
22
Forty Second Report ,Law Commission of India on Indian Penal Code, 52 (1971)
23
Rajan V.J. & Krishna K.P., Victims of Homicide, 73 (1981)
24
Palaniappa Gounder v. Tamil Nadu, AIR 1977 SC 213;

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE

 SYMBIOSIS LAW SCHOOL

Contrary to the limitation of Section 357, Section 357A provides a fresh perspective
addressing the lacuna in allocating responsibility to the State. It obligates state governments
to draw up victim compensation schemes. It also provides for compensation and measures of
rehabilitation where the order of compensation passed by the courts is inadequate. An
application for compensation under Section 357A can be made even when the offender has
not been traced or identified or in the absence of a trial.
In terms of interim assistance, the DLSA is obligated under Section 357A to make provisions
for immediate medical assistance, and such other relief, as the appropriate authority deems
fit.
However, the only drawback of Section 357A is that it is imperative for states to notify a
scheme and allocate budget so that applications may be processed effectively, and victims are
given compensation expeditiously.

What is an appeal? Discuss the Constitutional basis for

appeal along with the procedure in
case of acquittal. Answer with reference to appropriate
case laws.
APPEAL.
The term “appeal” has not been defined in the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973. According to
the dictionary meaning, an appeal is a complaint or grievance to a superior court for
reconsideration or review of a decision, verdict or sentence of a lower court.25 It has been said
that every human being is fallible, and a judge is not an exception. It is thus possible that
even a judge may err or commit mistake and his decision may be wrong or faulty. Article 25
of the Constitution of India guarantees life and liberty to every citizen, small or big, rich or
poor, as one of the Fundamental Rights. It is, therefore, necessary that a person aggrieved by
an order of the court of the first instance may be able to challenge it by preferring an appeal.
An appeal is a method of correction of manly error or solution of human frailty.
Chapter XXXIX (Section 372 – 394 of Cr.PC) deals with Appeals.
A right of Appeal is not a natural or inherent right. It is a statutory right and must be
governed by the statute which grants it.26
SECTION 372 provides, no appeal lies except otherwise provided by the Code or by any
other law for the time being in force. Under Articles 132, 134 and 136 of the Constitution of
India, it may be possible to present an appeal to the Supreme Court against the order of
acquittal passed by the High Court.

25
BLACK’S LAW DICTIONARY, (4TH edn.), p.124
26
Akalu v. Ram Deo, AIR 1973 SC 2145

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE

 SYMBIOSIS LAW SCHOOL

CONSTITUTIONAL BASIS OF AN APPEAL.

The appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme Court can be invoked by a certificate granted by the
High Court concerned under Article 132(1), 133(1) or 134 of the Constitution in respect of
any judgement, decree or final order of a High Court in both civil and criminal cases,
involving substantial questions of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution.

Appeals also lie to the Supreme Court in civil matters if the High Court concerned certifies:
(a) that the case involves a substantial question of law of general importance, and
(b) that, in the opinion of the High Court, the said question needs to be decided by the
Supreme Court. In criminal cases, an appeal lies to the Supreme Court if the High Court (a)
has on appeal reversed an order of acquittal of an accused person and sentenced him to death
or to imprisonment for life or for a period of not less than 10 years, or (b) has withdrawn for
trial before itself any case from any Court subordinate to its authority and has in such trial
convicted the accused and sentenced him to death or to imprisonment for life or for a period
of not less than 10 years, or (c) certified that the case is a fit one for appeal to the Supreme
Court. Parliament is authorised to confer on the Supreme Court any further powers to
entertain and hear appeals from any judgement, final order or sentence in a criminal
proceeding of a High Court.

The Supreme Court has also a very wide appellate jurisdiction over all Courts and Tribunals
in India in as much as it may, in its discretion, grant special leave to appeal under Article 136
of the Constitution from any judgment, decree, determination, sentence or order in any cause
or matter passed or made by any Court or Tribunal in the territory of India.
Article 132 of the Constitution of India, 1950 provides for an appeal to the Supreme Court
from any judgment, decree or final order of a High Court, whether in civil, criminal or other
proceedings, if the High Court certifies that the case involves a substantial question of law as
to the interpretation of the Constitution.

Article 133 of the Constitution of India, 1950 provides for an appeal to the Supreme Court
from any judgment, decree or final order in a civil proceeding of a High Court if the High
Court certifies that the case involves a substantial question of law of general importance and
in its opinion the said question needs to be decided by the Supreme Court.

Article 134 of the Constitution of India, 1950 provides for an appeal to the Supreme Court
from any judgment, final order or sentence in a criminal proceeding of a High Court if (a) it
has on appeal reversed an order of acquittal of an accused person and sentenced him to death
or (b) has withdrawn for trial before itself, any case from any Court subordinate to it and has
in such trial convicted the accused and sentenced him to death or (c) it certifies that the case
is a fit one for appeal to the Supreme Court.
Article 136 of the Constitution of India, 1950 provides that the Supreme Court may in its
discretion grant special leave to appeal from any judgment, decree, determination, sentence
or order in any case or matter passed or made by any Court or tribunal in the territory of India
except the Court or tribunal constituted by or under any law relating to armed forces.

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE

 SYMBIOSIS LAW SCHOOL

As per the Article 136 of the Constitution of India, the criminal appeal can be maintained in
the Supreme Court of India under the appellate jurisdiction of Supreme Court of India. Under
this jurisdiction, the Constitution grants power to any person to approach the Hon’ble apex
court in case he/she is not satisfied with the decision of any lower court. Even, high court
enjoys the powers of Appellate jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

APPEAL IN CASE OF ACQUITTAL.

Section 378 provides for Appeal against acquittal. The provision is as follows-:
1.
1. the District Magistrate may, in any case, direct the Public Prosecutor to
present an appeal to the Court of Session from an order of acquittal passed by
a Magistrate in respect of a cognizable and non-bailable offence;
2. the State Government may, in any case, direct the Public Prosecutor to present
an appeal to the High Court from an original or appellate order of an acquittal
passed by any Court other than a High Court [not being an order under clause
(a) or an order of acquittal passed by the Court of Session in revision.”;
2. If such an order of acquittal is passed in any case in which the offence has been
investigated by the Delhi Special Police Establishment constituted under the Delhi
Special Police Establishment Act, 1946 (25 of 1946) or by any other agency
empowered to make investigation into an offence under any Central Act other than
this Code, the Central Government may, subject to the provisions of Sub-Section (3),
also direct the Public Prosecutor to present an appeal-
1. to the Court of Session, from an order of acquittal passed by a Magistrate in
respect of a cognizable and non-bailable offence;
2. to the High Court from an original or appellate order of an acquittal passed by
any Court other than a High Court [not being an order under clause (a) or an
order of acquittal passed by the Court of Session in revision.
3. No appeal under Sub-Section (1) or Sub-Section (2) shall be 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).

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE

 SYMBIOSIS LAW SCHOOL

CRITICAL ANALYSIS.
This section seeks to restrict the right of appeal against a judgment of acquittal and the
Government should file an appeal against acquittal in only those cases in which grave
injustice seems to have occasioned. The High Court has discretion to refuse to grant leave to
appeal against an acquittal.
Generally, order of acquittal is not interfered with but there is no embargo on Appellate Court
for re-appreciating evidence in a case where admissible evidence is ignored by the trial Court.
The right of the State to appeal against acquittal stands on the same footing as the right of the
convicted person to appeal against his conviction and sentence and the procedure to be
adopted for disposing of the appeal in both the cases is same.
The provisions contained in Section 378 deal with appeals against acquittal and, therefore,
they have no application against an order of discharge. While hearing such appeal, the
Appellate Court should not lose sight of two basic principles of Criminal Law, namely:
(1) presumption of innocence of the person accused unless his guilt is proved; and
(2) benefit of doubt always tilts in favour of the accused.
As a matter of fact, the acquittal of the convicted person by the trial Court by itself is
sufficient to strengthen the presumption of innocence in his favour.
The Supreme Court in Harijana Tirupala v. Public Prosecutor27, High Court of Andhra
Pradesh, has observed that the Appellate Court will not be justified to interfere in an appeal
against acquittal merely because other view was possible. Elaborating the point further, the
Apex Court held that there is no doubt that High Court is the Court of first appeal in appeal
either against an order of acquittal or conviction and has full power to review the evidence to
reach its own independent conclusion.
However, it will not interfere with an order of acquittal lightly or merely because one other
view is possible, and with the passing of an order of acquittal presumption of innocence in
favour of accused gets strengthened.
A duty is cast on the High Court while reversing an order of acquittal to examine and discuss
the reasons given by the trial Court to acquit the accused and then to dispel those reasons. If
the High Court fails to make such an exercise, the judgment will suffer from serious
infirmity.
Reiterating its earlier view on power of Appellate Court in appeal against acquittal the
Supreme Court once again held in the case of C. Antony v. K.G. Rahgavan Nair28, that the
Appellate Court has full power to reappreciate the evidence but it has to do so without
coming to a definite conclusion that the findings given by trial Court are perverse.
It cannot substitute the findings of trial Court by taking a totally different perspective. In this
case a complaint of dishonour of cheque was dismissed by trial Court for want of proof of
advancement of money by the complainant. The High Court without holding that finding of

27
AIR 2002 SC 2821
28
(2003) 1 SCC 1

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE

 SYMBIOSIS LAW SCHOOL

trial Court perverse and totally on different perspective converted the acquittal into
conviction. The order of the High Court was therefore set aside.
In one of its earlier decisions in State of Punjab v. Sukhchain Singh29, the Apex Court had
observed that in case of acquittal, there is double presumption in favour of the accused.
Firstly, the presumption of innocence is available to him under the fundamental principle of
criminal jurisprudence that every person should be presumed to be innocent unless he is
proved to be guilty by the competent Court of law.
Secondly, the accused having secured acquittal, the presumption of his innocence is further
strengthened, reinforced and reaffirmed by the trial Court. The appellate Court should re-
appreciate the evidence in the light of these presumptions while deciding an appeal against
acquittal.
The Apex Court in N. Somashekar v. State of Kamataka30, held that intervention in appeal
against acquittal is limited evidence was not properly analysed and conclusion drawn was
based on suimises and conjectures. The only criterion is that if the view taken by the trial
Court is reasonable and possible view, interference should not be made. In the instant case,
the evidence clearly establishes that accused was the perpetrator of the crime. The High Court
was, therefore, justified in directing conviction and imposing the sentence.
In appeal, the High Court after reappraisal of evidence reversed the acquittal by showing how
the reasons recorded by trial Court for acquittal were opposed to weight of available
evidence. The Supreme Court held that the reversal of acquittal by High Court was proper
and well justified.
In State of Madhya Pradesh v. Dharkole31, the Court had acquitted the accused by putting
stress on aspects like political party of the accused etc. Inference drawn by Court that conduct
of eyewitness was unusual, was not proper.
The reasons for not examining the independent witnesses were also not given by the
prosecution. Under the circumstances it was held that judgment of acquittal was indefeasible
and liable to be set aside.
The Supreme Court has reiterated the principles laid down by the Privy Council in regard to
appeal against acquittal and held that while considering such appeal the High Court should
give proper weight to the consideration that in finding of fact arrived at by a Judge of the trial
Court is based on credibility of witnesses whom he had opportunity to examine in person.
An appeal from an order of acquittal must be filed within the period of limitation prescribed
by Article 114 of the Schedule of the Limitation Act, 1963. For the extension of the period of
limitation, and for exclusion of time in computing the period of limitation, Sections 5 and 12
of the Limitation Act, 1963 would be useful.

29
AIR 2008 SC 1095
30
AIR 2004 SC 1422
31
2005 CRI LJ 108

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE

 SYMBIOSIS LAW SCHOOL

Appeal against an order of acquittal is an extraordinary remedy. In exercising this power, the
High Court should give proper weight and consideration to Very substantial and
compelling reasons. These include-:
▪ The trial court’s conclusion with regard to the facts is palpably wrong;
▪ The trial court’s decision was based on an incorrect view of law;
▪ The trial court’s judgment is likely to result in “grave miscarriage of justice”;
▪ The entire approach of the trial court in dealing with the evidence was patently illegal;
▪ The trial court’s judgment was manifestly unjust and unreasonable;
▪ The trial court has ignored the evidence or misread the material evidence or has
ignored material documents like dying declarations/ report of the Ballistic expert, etc.
▪ This list is intended to be illustrative, not exhaustive.
The Appellate Court must always give proper weight and consideration to the findings of the
trial court. If two reasonable views can be reached – one that leads to acquittal, the other to
conviction – the High Court’s/appellate courts must rule in favour of the accused.
The Supreme Court in CHANDRAPPA V. STATE OF KARNATAKA32 has laid down general
principles regarding powers of appellate Court while dealing with appeals against acquittal.
They may be briefly stated as follows:
(1) An Appellate Court has full power to review, re-appreciate and reconsider the evidence
upon which the order of acquittal was founded.
(2) The Code of Criminal Procedure puts no limitation, restriction or condition on exercise of
such power and Appellate Court on the evidence before it may reach its own conclusion, both
on question of law and of fact.
(3) Various expressions such as ‘substantial and compelling reason’, ‘good and sufficient’
ground, ‘distorted conclusions’, ‘glaring mistakes’ etc. are not intended to curtail the
extensive powers of an Appellate Court in an appeal against acquittal.
(4) An Appellate Court, however, must bear in mind that in case of acquittal, there is double
presumption in favour of the accused. Firstly, the presumption of innocence available to him
under fundamental principles of criminal jurisprudence and secondly, the accused having
secured his acquittal, the presumption of his innocence is further reinforced, reaffirmed and
strengthened by the trial Court.
(5) If two reasonable conclusions are possible on the basis of the evidence on record, the
Appellate Court should not disturb the finding of acquittal recorded by the trial Court.

32
[2008] INSC 723

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE

 SYMBIOSIS LAW SCHOOL

NEED OF AMENDMENT.
While Section 378 of Cr. P.C. does not take into account Judgements of acquittal, it only
refers to Orders of acquittal which can be appealed against. This is a serious hiatus in the
Code that requires to be rectified as a conjoint reading of Section 372 and Section 378 would
clearly indicate that apparently there is no provision to challenge Judgements of acquittal and
hence the same would not be maintainable because unless an appeal is specifically provided
for it does not lie. The consequential drastic effect of this is that only a revision would be
maintainable and in revisional jurisdiction it is impermissible to convert an Order of acquittal
into conviction by virtue of Section 401 (3) of the code. Consequently, there is an urgent need
for a legislative amendment in Order to fill up this gap. Else, the victims of crime would be
deprived of a key right of accessing justice.

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE