Order 11/07/2025

1. The petitioner happens to be the complainant of a criminal prosecution under Section 138 of the NI Act and has challenged the judgment dated 24.03.2022 passed by the learned Special Judicial Magistrate (NI Act Cases), Chittorgarh, whereby he convicted the accused, sentenced him, and made order for paying compensation.

2. The petitioner appears to be aggrieved by the amount of compensation, as it is averred in the memo of appeal. By inserting a proviso to Section 372 of the Cr.P.C., a victim has been conferred upon a right to prefer an appeal challenging the judgment on the ground of inadequate compensation. If the judgment is passed by a Judicial Magistrate, then the appeal would lie before the concerned Sessions Judge, which in this case is the Sessions Judge, Chittorgarh. (Downloaded on 15/07/2025 at 09:31:35 PM)

[2025:RJ-JD:30357] (2 of 2) [CRLAS-1471/2024]

3. No direct appeal before this Court against the judgment of a Judicial Magistrate is provided under law; therefore, the instant appeal is not maintainable.

4. There is one other aspect, which is that the appeal is filed belatedly and thus barred by 499 days. No application for condonation of delay has been filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act. If an appeal is filed beyond the prescribed period, then the same cannot be entertained unless it is accompanied by an application for condonation of delay. Therefore, this ground also suggests that the instant appeal deserves to be dismissed.

5. In this legal compulsion, there is no other way out except to dismiss the appeal.

6. Accordingly, the instant criminal appeal is dismissed.

(FARJAND ALI),J 77-Samvedana/-

(Downloaded on 15/07/2025 at 09:31:35 PM) Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)