Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023
कलम 419
Appeal in case of acquittal
(1) Save as otherwise provided in sub-section (2), and subject to the provisions of sub-sections (3) and (5),—
(a) 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;
(b) 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 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 a case in which the offence has been investigated by any agency empowered to make investigation into an offence under any Central Act other than this Sanhita, the Central Government may, subject to the provisions of sub-section (3), also direct the Public Prosecutor to present an appeal—
(a) to the Court of Session, from an order of acquittal passed by a Magistrate in respect of a cognizable and non-bailable offence;
(b) 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 to the High Court 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).
पडताळणी प्रलंबित
हे का आहे
निर्दोष मुक्ततेला घटनेत लक्षणीय वजन असते — एखाद्याची निर्दोष मुक्तता झाल्यावर निरपराध मानले जाण्याचा अनुमोदनबळ अधिक दृढ होते; त्यामुळे कायदा जाणीवपूर्वक निर्दोष मुक्ततेविरुद्ध अपील करणे, दोषसिद्धीविरुद्ध अपीलापेक्षा कठीण ठेवतो. सरकारी मान्यता (किंवा खाजगी फिर्यादींसाठी उच्च न्यायालयाची परवानगी) आवश्यक ठेवणे हे कमकुवत किंवा सूडभावनेतून केलेली अपिले गाळून टाकते, पण स्पष्टपणे चुकीच्या निर्दोष मुक्ततांना आव्हान देण्याचा खरा मार्गही उरतो. हा तरतूद-आधारित दृष्टिकोन CrPC, 1973 च्या कलम 378 च्या पुढील सातत्यात आहे.
न्यायालये याला कशी वाचतात
निर्दोष मुक्ततेविरुद्ध अपिले तपासताना अपीलीय न्यायालये सावध निकष लावतात: निर्दोष मुक्तता निरपराधतेच्या अनुमोदनबळाला बळकटी देते, आणि केवळ खटला न्यायालयाचा दृष्टिकोन उघडपणे अविवेकी किंवा विकृत असेल तेव्हाच अपीलीय हस्तक्षेप करावा; केवळ त्याच पुराव्यावर दुसरा दृष्टीकोन शक्य आहे म्हणून हस्तक्षेप करू नये — असा सिद्धांत सर्वोच्च न्यायालयाच्या निर्णयांमधून, निर्दोष मुक्ततेवरील अपीलांत अपीलीय न्यायालयांच्या समकक्ष अधिकाराच्या व्याख्येतून विकसित झाला आहे (उदा., Chandrappa v. State of Karnataka).
सामान्य गृहितके
धरण: कोणीही निर्दोष मुक्ततेविरुद्ध, जसे दोषसिद्धीविरुद्ध, मनमोकळेपणाने अपील करू शकतो.
घटना: निर्दोष मुक्ततेविरुद्ध अपीलांसाठी किंवा सरकारी मान्यता, किंवा खाजगी फिर्यादींसाठी उच्च न्यायालयाची विशेष परवानगी — आणि तीही कडक कालमर्यादेत — आवश्यक असते.