Chunni Lal vs Chhotey and Others

O.P. Mehrotra, J.—This list has been revised. No one appears for the Appellant (complainant) Sri. Virendra Saran, Counsel for the accused-Respondent and the learned AGA are present. Sri. Virendra Saran, learned Counsel for the accused Respondent raised a preliminary objection that this appeal was not maintainable as this was a police chalani case and hence the complainant has no right to file an appeal. The record shows that complainant Chunni Lal filed an application for leave to appeal u/s 378(4) Code of Criminal Procedure and the said application was allowed on 31-1-79 and the appeal was then admitted. Section 378(4) Code of Criminal Procedure has, however, no application to the present case because it was not a complaint case but a police chalani case, which is evident from the lower Court''s judgment as well as from the record of the case. As such the State Government had a right to file ah appeal against the order of acquittal and the complainant had no such right.

In view of the above, the present appeal is not maintainable and is accordingly dismissed.