6. cr appln 4483-10.doc RMA IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.4483 OF 2010 Late Smt. Manurani Bose through her Legal Heir Mr. Ron Guha .. Applicant Vs The State of Maharashtra & Ors .. Respondents Mr. Bharat Rathod for the Applicant Mr. Chetan Akerkar for Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 Ms. A.A. Mane, APP for the State CORAM : SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI, J DATE : 14th OCTOBER, 2010. P.C.: 1. Heard learned advocate for the applicant-original complainant, learned advocate for respondent nos. 2 and 3- original accused and learned APP for the State. 2. Being aggrieved by judgment and order dated 23rd March 2010 passed by learned Metropolitan Magistrate, 32nd Court, Bandra, Mumbai in C.C. No. 1513-PW-2005, the applicant has preferred this application. By the said judgment and order, the learned Magistrate acquitted the respondent nos. 1 and 2-original accused under Sections 452, 380, 406, 342, 343, 328, 467, 484 read with 34 of IPC . 1 6. cr appln 4483-10.doc 3. The learned advocate for the respondents-original accused has submitted that no doubt, in view of Section 372 of Cr.P.C., the complainant or victim has a right to prefer an application against any order passed by the Court acquitting the accused. However, he submitted that Section 372 provides that such appeal shall lie to the Court to which the appeal ordinarily lies against the order of conviction of such court. He submitted that as the learned Magistrate has passed the order of acquittal, in such case, the appeal would lie before the Sessions Court because in case, the Magistrate has convicted the accused, the appeal would lie before the Sessions Court. I find much merit in this submission. 4. In view of Section 372 of Cr.P.C., the appeal ought to have been preferred before the Sessions Court as the order of acquittal has been passed by the learned Magistrate, hence this application is disposed of with liberty to the applicant to prefer necessary appeal before the Sessions Court. 5. The learned advocate for respondents fairly states that they will not raise any objection regarding delay in filing the appeal before the Sessions Court. In view of this statements, the learned Sessions Judge shall condone the delay, if any, in filing the appeal and the appeal be disposed of on merits. All contentions of the parties are 2 6. cr appln 4483-10.doc kept open. 6. Application is disposed of. [SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI, J.] 3