1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR. J U D G M E N T State of Rajasthan vs. Prem Singh S.B. Criminal Leave to Appeal No.337 of 2008 under Section 378 (i) and (iii) Cr.P.C. against the judgment dated 17.04.2008 passed by Shri Satish Chandra, RJS, Chief Judicial Magistrate, Karauli in Criminal Case No.623/2001. Date of Judgment :::: 25.03.2009 Present HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE BHANWAROO KHAN Mr. Bhvnish Kumawat, P.P. Mr. V.S.Chauhan for accused respondent. By the Court: This leave to appeal has been filed by the State of Rajasthan against the judgment dated 17.04.2008 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Karauli whereby the accused respondent Prem Singh has been acquitted of the offence under Sections 279 and 304A IPC. This Court in the matter of State of Rajasthan vs. Ram Gopal (S.B.Criminal Leave to Appeal No.257/2008, decided on 4.3.2009) has an occasion to consider the question as to whether after amendment in Section 378 Cr.P.C. by the 2 Cr.P.C. Amendment Act (Act No.25 of 2005) leave to appeal against the judgment of acquittal passed by a Judicial Magistrate is maintainable directly to this Court. Referring to the amended Section 378 Cr.P.C. this Court held as under:- “A perusal of the amended sub-section (1) of Section 378 Cr.P.C. would reveal that if any order of acquittal is passed by a Magistrate in respect of a cognizable and non-bailable offence, the District Magistrate may, in any case, direct the Public Prosecutor to present an appeal to the Court of Session. Before amendment, it was the State Government who 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 or an order of acquittal passed by the Court of Session in revision but after amendment, in view of clause (a) of Section 378(1) Cr.P.C. if the order of acquittal has been passed by a court of the Magistrate then appeal would lie to the court of Sessions. Therefore, I am of the opinion that in view of clause (a) of Section 378(1) Cr.P.C. the appeal should have been presented before the concerned court of Sessions.” As a result of the discussions hereinabove, the appeal filed by the appellant State in the High Court against the order of acquittal passed by Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate is held to be non-maintainable in view of clause (a) of Section 378(1) Cr.P.C. and the same is disposed of accordingly with the 3 direction to the Public Prosecutor to present the appeal before the concerned court of Sessions. The time during which the appeal remained pending in this Court would be excluded from the period of limitation.” In view of the law laid down by this Court in the matter of Ram Gopal (supra) and in view of clause (a) of Section 378(1) Cr.P.C., the present leave to appeal filed by the appellant State in this Court against the order of acquittal passed by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Karauli is held to be non-maintainable and the same is disposed of accordingly with the direction to the Public Prosecutor to present the appeal before the concerned court of Sessions. The time during which the appeal remained pending in this Court would be excluded from the period of limitation. (Bhanwaroo Khan),J. bairwa