The Supreme Court has clarified the forum for victims seeking to challenge an acquittal by a Magistrate, holding that such appeals must be filed before the Sessions Court rather than the High Court.
A bench comprising Justice JB Pardiwala and Justice K. Vinod Chandran upheld the Calcutta High Court’s decision declining to entertain a victim’s appeal against an acquittal by a Judicial Magistrate. The Court, however, allowed the victim to pursue the matter before the appropriate Sessions Court.
The ruling turned on the interpretation of Section 413 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), particularly its proviso dealing with a victim’s right to appeal.
The case arose after the petitioner’s son, who had been suffering from depressive disorders, died by suicide following his admission to a hospital. The petitioner alleged that negligence by a doctor and a nurse had contributed to the death. An FIR was registered under Section 304A read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
Following the Magistrate’s decision to acquit the accused, the petitioner approached the Calcutta High Court. The High Court concluded that it did not have jurisdiction to hear the victim’s appeal and permitted the petitioner to approach the Sessions Court instead.
The matter subsequently reached the Supreme Court.
How the BNSS provisions apply
The Supreme Court examined the relationship between Sections 413, 415(3) and 419 of the BNSS.
Section 413 gives a victim a statutory right to appeal when an accused is acquitted, convicted of a lesser offence or when inadequate compensation is awarded. The provision specifies that the appeal must go to the court where an appeal against a conviction by the same court would ordinarily lie.
The Court noted that Section 415(3) provides for an appeal to the Sessions Court when a person has been convicted following a trial before a Magistrate of the First or Second Class.
On that basis, the Court held that the same appellate forum applies when a victim challenges an acquittal delivered by a Magistrate.
The Court also distinguished this remedy from the general provision governing appeals against acquittal under Section 419 BNSS. According to the judgment, the specific remedy available to a victim under the proviso to Section 413 governs such an appeal.
The Court therefore concluded that the nature of the offence does not alter the appellate forum where the acquittal was passed by a Magistrate. The victim must approach the Sessions Court.
The Supreme Court consequently dismissed the special leave petition while granting the petitioner liberty to file the appeal before the Sessions Court.
It also protected the petitioner from the consequences of delay caused by pursuing the matter before the wrong forum. The Court directed that if the appeal is filed within one month from the date of its order, it should be admitted and considered on its merits without treating the intervening period as a delay attributable to the victim.
