Case Note & Summary
The appellant, Parvinder Kansal, was the father of a deceased boy and the complainant in FIR No.742 of 2007 registered for offences under Section 364A read with Section 34 IPC. The second respondent was convicted under Sections 364A, 302, and 201 IPC and sentenced to life imprisonment with fines. The appellant filed an appeal under Section 372 CrPC before the Delhi High Court seeking enhancement of the sentence to death penalty. The High Court dismissed the appeal as not maintainable. The Supreme Court, in this appeal, examined the scope of the proviso to Section 372 CrPC, which allows a victim to appeal against acquittal, conviction for a lesser offence, or inadequate compensation. The Court held that the remedy of appeal is a creature of statute and that the proviso does not confer a right on the victim to appeal against inadequacy of sentence. The power to seek enhancement of sentence lies exclusively with the State Government under Section 377 CrPC. The Supreme Court found no merit in the appeal and dismissed it, affirming the High Court's order.
Headnote
A) Criminal Procedure - Right of Appeal - Victim's Appeal - Section 372, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - The proviso to Section 372 CrPC grants the victim a right to appeal only against an order of acquittal, conviction for a lesser offence, or imposition of inadequate compensation. It does not permit an appeal against inadequacy of sentence. The remedy for enhancement of sentence lies with the State Government under Section 377 CrPC. The High Court correctly dismissed the victim's appeal as not maintainable. (Paras 9-10)
B) Criminal Procedure - Enhancement of Sentence - State's Exclusive Right - Section 377, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - The power to seek enhancement of sentence is vested exclusively in the State Government under Section 377 CrPC. A victim cannot file an appeal under Section 372 CrPC on the ground of inadequate sentence. The Supreme Court upheld the High Court's order dismissing the victim's appeal. (Paras 7-10)
Issue of Consideration
Whether a victim can maintain an appeal under Section 372 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 seeking enhancement of sentence imposed on the accused?
Final Decision
The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal, holding that the victim cannot maintain an appeal under Section 372 CrPC for enhancement of sentence. The High Court's order dismissing the appeal as not maintainable was upheld.
Law Points
- Right of appeal is a creature of statute
- Victim's right of appeal under Section 372 CrPC is limited to acquittal
- conviction for lesser offence
- or inadequate compensation
- No appeal lies for inadequate sentence under Section 372 CrPC
- State Government alone can appeal for enhancement under Section 377 CrPC
Case Details
Criminal Appeal No. 555 of 2020 (Arising out of S.L.P.(Crl.)No.3928 of 2020)
Ashok Bhushan, R. Subhash Reddy
Ashwani Bhardwaj (for appellant), Chirag M. Shroff (for State of NCT of Delhi)
The State of NCT of Delhi & Anr.
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Criminal appeal against dismissal of victim's appeal for enhancement of sentence
Remedy Sought
Appellant sought enhancement of sentence from life imprisonment to death penalty for the accused convicted under Sections 302, 364A, 201 IPC
Filing Reason
Appellant aggrieved by the High Court's order dismissing his appeal under Section 372 CrPC as not maintainable
Previous Decisions
Sessions Court convicted the accused and sentenced him to life imprisonment; High Court dismissed the victim's appeal for enhancement
Issues
Whether a victim can maintain an appeal under Section 372 CrPC seeking enhancement of sentence?
Whether the High Court correctly dismissed the appeal as not maintainable?
Submissions/Arguments
Appellant argued that the proviso to Section 372 CrPC gives the victim a right to appeal when the accused is convicted for a lesser offence, and there is no reason to restrict the scope to lesser offence only and not lesser sentence. The case involved brutal murder of a child after ransom, warranting death penalty.
State argued that Section 372 CrPC only allows appeal by victim in cases of acquittal, conviction for lesser offence, or inadequate compensation, not for inadequate sentence. Enhancement of sentence is exclusively under Section 377 CrPC by the State Government.
Ratio Decidendi
The right of appeal is a creature of statute. The proviso to Section 372 CrPC confers a right on the victim to appeal only against acquittal, conviction for a lesser offence, or inadequate compensation. It does not permit an appeal against inadequacy of sentence. The power to seek enhancement of sentence lies exclusively with the State Government under Section 377 CrPC.
Judgment Excerpts
A reading of the proviso makes it clear that so far as victim’s right of appeal is concerned, same is restricted to three eventualities, namely, acquittal of the accused; conviction of the accused for lesser offence; or for imposing inadequate compensation.
It is fairly well settled that the remedy of appeal is creature of the Statute. Unless same is provided either under Code of Criminal Procedure or by any other law for the time being in force no appeal, seeking enhancement of sentence at the instance of the victim, is maintainable.
Procedural History
FIR No.742 of 2007 registered on 15.10.2007 under Section 364A read with Section 34 IPC. Chargesheet filed on 11.01.2008 under Sections 364A/302/201 IPC. Case committed to Sessions Court. Sessions Case No.58259 of 2016. Conviction on 30.07.2019 under Sections 364A, 302, 201 IPC. Sentence on 17.08.2019: life imprisonment under Sections 302 and 364A, 7 years RI under Section 201, with fines. Victim appealed to High Court under Section 372 CrPC for enhancement to death penalty. High Court dismissed appeal on 27.11.2019 as not maintainable. Supreme Court granted leave and dismissed the appeal on 28.08.2020.
Acts & Sections
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973: 372, 377, 428
- Indian Penal Code, 1860: 302, 364A, 201, 34
