Shashwati Chowdhury
Published on: July 11, 2022 at 18:26 IST
The Bombay High Court has ruled that a victim may seek an enhancement in their offender’s sentence through a revision and not by filing an appeal against the trial court’s order. The ruling was made by a Bench of Justices Sadhana S. Jadhav and Milind N. Jadhav.
After the woman’s father published a matrimonial ad in the “Times of India,” in 2010, the prospective groom from Uttar Pradesh sedated her under section 328 of the IPC, conned her under section 417 of the IPC, and threatened her under section 506. This woman, who works for a multinational company, filed a criminal appeal.
The woman filed the appeal in 2015 under section 372 of the CrPC to ask for an enhancement in the man’s punishment from seven years to a maximum of ten years. The Court noted that the appellant’s appeal had become infructuous because he had served the whole of the sentence imposed by the Sessions Judge. Thus, the complainant’s appeal was the only one left for consideration.
The Court noted Section 372 of the CrPC, which states that a judgement cannot be appealed unless it has been provided by a statute.
The Court noted that the State Government has the power to file an appeal for the enhancement of the sentence under Section 377 of the Criminal Procedure Code. The Court reffered the Parvinder Kansal v. The State of NCT of Delhi & Anr. judgment, in which the Apex Court held that the State Government has the authority to prefer an appeal for the enhancement of punishment under Section 372 CrPC. However, no such authority of appeal has been granted to the victim.
The court was of the opinion, “Without a doubt, a revision application for a sentence enhancement at the victim’s or complainant’s plea would be maintainable. But given the specific statutory requirements and the Supreme Court’s observations in the cases of Parvinder Kansal and Mallikarjun Kodagali, it is clear that the Appellant (victim) will not have the right of appealing against the sentence.”