(2018)2 SCeJ 1387

29 August, 2018.

 Criminal Procedure Code, 1860, Section 378(3) – High Court while dismissing the application for leave to appeal did not assign any reason  - High Court grossly erred in passing the impugned order without assigning any reason -  It was a clear case of total non-­application of mind to the case by the learned Judges because the order impugned neither sets out the facts nor the submissions of the parties nor the findings and nor the reasons as to why the leave to file appeal is declined to the appellant -  We, therefore, disapprove the casual approach of the High Court in deciding the application which, in our view, is against the law laid down by this Court in the case of State of Maharashtra vs. Sujay Mangesh Poyarekarm, (2008) 9 SCC 475 – Case remanded

PLR Supreme Court e@journal

 Annual subscription Rs. 1000/-


Full text with Headnotes through

email / WhatsApp




 Annual subscription Rs. 2400/-punjablawreporter@gmail.com / 9463598502  



Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 S. 378 - The only remedy available against the order of acquittal is to obtain leave to appeal from the High Court. (183) PLR (Del.)


Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 S. 378(4) - `Victim', who is not the complainant in a private complaint-case, is not entitled to prefer appeal against acquittal under proviso to Section 372 and his/her right to appeal, if any, continues to be governed by the unamended provisions read with Section 378(4) of the Code. (173) PLR

Register SCeJ  Free Updates*

Supreme Court e@journal

Subscribe or take a 4 week FREE trial 

Note: Please fill out the fields marked with an asterisk.