{"id":354287,"date":"2025-07-23T14:00:38","date_gmt":"2025-07-23T08:30:38","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=354287"},"modified":"2025-07-24T18:15:12","modified_gmt":"2025-07-24T12:45:12","slug":"supreme-court-holds-company-as-victim-under-crpc-legal-news","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/07\/23\/supreme-court-holds-company-as-victim-under-crpc-legal-news\/","title":{"rendered":"Know why Supreme Court held this Company as \u2018victim\u2019 within the ambit of S. 2(wa) read with Proviso to S. 372 CrPC?"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

Supreme Court:<\/span> While considering this appeal by Asian Paints Ltd, (appellant) whereby the Division Bench of Ahsanuddin Amanullah*<\/span> and Prashant Kumar Mishra, JJ., were faced with the question that whether the appellant would fall under the definition of \u2018victim\u2019 as per Section 2(wa) read with the proviso to Section 372<\/a> of the CrPC<\/a> or whether Section 378<\/a> of the CrPC<\/a> would prevail in the facts and circumstances of the present case. The Court opined that Section 2(wa)<\/a> CrPC<\/a> does not define \u2018victim\u2019 in a narrow sense. The Court further stated that Section 372<\/a> of the CrPC<\/a> is a self-contained and independent Section<\/span>; i.e., it is a stand-alone Section and is<\/span> not regulated by other provisions<\/span> of Chapter XXIX of the CrPC<\/a> including Section 378. Thus, the right of a victim to prefer an appeal as granted under the proviso to Section 372<\/a> of the CrPC<\/a> is not restricted by any other provision of the CrPC<\/a><\/p>\n

Therefore, the Court opined that Appellant was a \u2018victim\u2019 as it suffered due to the counterfeit\/fake products being sold\/attempted to be sold as having been manufactured by the Appellant.<\/p>\n

Background, Legal Trajectory and Contentions:<\/h3>\n

The appellant, a public limited company, has been engaged in the business of manufacturing paint and paint products for approximately the last 73 years. In the face of counterfeit products being made and sold in the market in its name and style, the Appellant had given a Power of Attorney (PoA) to AS, the proprietor of Solution (an IPR consultancy firm) through its authorized representatives, who were tasked with monitoring, tracking down and investigating unauthorised and illegal practices employed in respect of the appellant\u2019s Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) comprising, inter alia, trademarks and copyrights owned\/used by the appellant. AS was also asked to undertake survey, investigate and act against any person found to be engaged in violating or infringing the appellant\u2019s IPR, including but not limited to the Trade Marks Act, 1999<\/a> and the Copyright Act, 1957<\/a>.<\/p>\n

AS authorised PKS to undertake surveys, inquire, detect and investigate against any and all organisations\/individuals for any violation\/infringement\/passing off or unauthorized\/unlawful use of the Appellant\u2019s brand names, trademarks, copyrights, special packing and designs and to file the necessary complaints against organizations\/individuals responsible for the same, with the appropriate enforcement agency and to take all necessary action for and on behalf of Solution.<\/p>\n

Subsequently, PKS presented written information at the Tunga Police Station to the effect that he saw that counterfeit products, claiming to be of the appellant, were kept at the shop of Ganpati Traders, which was owned by Respondent. The shop was thoroughly checked, wherein 12 buckets purportedly filled with paint bearing a mark similar to that of the appellant were found. The police filed the FIR under Sections 420<\/a>\/120B<\/a> of the Penal Code, 1860<\/a> (\u2018IPC\u2019) and under Sections 63<\/a>\/65<\/a> of the Copyright Act<\/a> against Respondent. the investigation commenced; the State Forensic Science Laboratory submitted its Report stating that the seized counterfeit material) did not tally with the original Asian Paints products in size, spacing and design of characters.<\/p>\n

The Additional Senior Civil Judge and Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate convicted Respondent under Section 420<\/a> of the IPC<\/a> and under Sections 63<\/a> & 65<\/a> of the Copyright Act<\/a>. Pursuant to his conviction, Respondent preferred Criminal Appeal before Additional Sessions Judge, Bassi, Jaipur Metropolitan (First Appellate Court), which was decided in the Respondent\u2019s favour.<\/p>\n

Aggrieved by the Respondent\u2019s acquittal, the appellant approached Rajasthan High Court. The High Court via its impugned judgement, dismissed the appeal on the ground that the Appeal under the proviso to Section 372<\/a> of the CrPC<\/a> to challenge an order passed in an appeal under Section 374<\/a> of the CrPC<\/a> was not maintainable. The High Court opined that since the Appellant was neither considered as complainant nor as victim before the Trial Court, therefore, the Appellant\u2019s Appeal as a victim under the proviso to Section 372<\/a> of the CrPC<\/a> was unsustainable.<\/p>\n

Aggrieved, the Appellant approached before the Supreme Court, contending that the term \u2018person\u2019 in Section 2(wa)<\/a> of the CrPC<\/a> also includes a \u2018Company or Association or body of persons\u2019 by virtue of Section 11<\/a> of the IPC<\/a>. As such, the Appellant would fall within the contours of the term \u2018victim\u2019.<\/p>\n

Per contra<\/span>, counsel for Respondent persuasively contended that an appeal under Section 372<\/a> of the CrPC<\/a> is guided and controlled by Section 374<\/a> of the CrPC<\/a>, which is evident from the words \u2018such appeal shall lie to the Court to which an appeal ordinarily lies against the order of conviction of such Court\u2019 used in the proviso to Section 372<\/a> of the CrPC<\/a>. It was submitted that Section 374<\/a> of the CrPC<\/a> does not provide for filing an appeal against an order passed in appeal by the First Appellate Court.<\/p>\n

Court\u2019s Assessment:<\/h3>\n

Perusing the issue, the Court took note of Sections 2(wa)<\/a>, 372<\/a>, 374<\/a> and 378<\/a> of the CrPC<\/a>, and explained that Section 2(wa) \u2018victim\u2019 in plain and simple language and has thoughtfully accorded an expansive understanding to the term \u2018victim\u2019<\/span> and not a narrow or restricted meaning. It is not necessary for the \u2018victim\u2019 to also be the \u2018complainant\u2019 or the \u2018informant\u2019 in a given case.<\/p>\n

The Court pointed out that whatever action was taken either by PKS or by Solution related to the infringement of IPR with regard to the Appellant\u2019s products, was clearly for and on behalf of the Appellant. It was ultimately the interest of the Appellant which was sought to be served<\/span> through the engagement of Solution and by extension PKS as its Field Operative. In the present case, it is clear that the allegation directly relates to wrongdoings on the part of Respondent in displaying, keeping in his shop and being in possession of materials\/products which are similar to those manufactured\/sold\/distributed by the Appellant which also bore its mark on the outside packaging i.e., the bucket in which it was contained, to be specific \u2018paints\u2019 which indicated\/mis-indicated that such products were of the Appellant. Furthermore, though no formal order on the impleadment application\/petition may have been passed but the Appellant\u2019s arguments were heard by the First Appellate Court, as the complainant.<\/p>\n

The Court pointed out that ultimately, it is the Appellant who suffered due to the counterfeit\/fake products being sold\/attempted to be sold<\/span> as having been manufactured by the Appellant. The Appellant would suffer financial loss and reputational injury if such products would be bought by the public under the mistaken belief that the same belonged to the Appellant\u2019s brand.<\/p>\n

The Court further explained that Section 372<\/a> of the CrPC<\/a> stipulates that no appeal shall lie from any judgment or order of a Criminal Court except as provided for by the CrPC<\/a> by any other law for the time being in force. Section 372<\/a> of the CrPC<\/a> falls under Chapter XXIX which relates to Appeals. Chapter XXIX (which also includes Section 378) deals with all contingencies relating to Appeals under the CrPC<\/a>.<\/p>\n

The Court stated that proviso to Section 372<\/a> of the CrPC<\/a> operates independently of and shall not be read conjointly with any other provision<\/span> in the CrPC<\/a>, much less Section 378<\/a> of the CrPC<\/a>.<\/p>\n

Considering the scope of Section 378<\/a> CrPC<\/a>, the Court noted that on an isolated reading of Section 378(3)<\/a> of the CrPC<\/a>, the first impression is that leave of the High Court for maintaining an appeal to that Court is a mandatory condition. However, given the issue in the facts of the instant case, it must be first considered whether Section 372 would directly cover the situation or be circumscribed by the provisions of Section 378<\/a> of the CrPC<\/a>.<\/p>\n

The Court found that High Court took an extreme direction while considering this issue by interpreting the term \u2018complainant\u2019 to be only the person who actually filed the written complaint<\/span>, namely PKS; which is why the High Court did not consider Appellant as \u2018victim\u2019. The Court observed that the High Court\u2019s finding negated the proviso to Section 372<\/a> of the CrPC<\/a>.<\/p>\n

The Court further considered that whether an appeal under the proviso to Section 372<\/a> of the CrPC<\/a> would be restricted only to mean an appeal to the First Appellate Court or include even an appeal to the Second Appellate Court\/High Court. It was explained that the language employed by the proviso to Section 372<\/a> of the CrPC<\/a> is unambiguous to the effect that \u2018the victim shall have a right to prefer an appeal against any order passed by the Court acquitting the accused or convicting for a lesser offence or imposing inadequate compensation, and such appeal shall lie to the Court to which an appeal ordinarily lies against the order of conviction of such Court.\u2019<\/p>\n

Therefore, the right to appeal accrues on the \u2018victim\u2019 from the instance of a Court acquitting the accused. \u201cThe proviso to Section 372<\/a> of the CrPC<\/a> is agnostic to the factum of such acquittal being by the Trial Court or the First Appellate Court<\/span>\u201d. The Court clarified that its view that the right of a victim to prefer an appeal as granted under the proviso to Section 372<\/a> of the CrPC<\/a> being not restricted by any other provision of the CrPC<\/a>, serves the salutary purpose of safeguarding the rights of the victim.<\/p>\n

Therefore, with the afore-stated assessment, the Court set aside the High Court\u2019s impugned judgment and restored the Appellant’s criminal appeal to its original file.<\/p>\n

[Asian Paints Limited v. Ram Babu, 2025 SCC OnLine SC 1427<\/a>, decided on 14-7-2025<\/span>]<\/p>\n

*Judgment by Ahsanuddin Amanullah<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

\n

Advocates who appeared in this case:<\/p>\n

For Petitioner(s):<\/span> Mr. Ajay Singh, Adv. Ms. Alka Sinha, Adv. Mr. Anuvrat Sharma, AOR<\/p>\n

For Respondent(s):<\/span> Mr. Thakur Sumit, Adv. Mr. Arvind Gupta, AOR Mr. S. Udaya Kumar Sagar, AOR<\/p>\n

Buy Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 \u00a0HERE<\/a><\/h3>\n

\"Code<\/a><\/p>\n

Buy Penal Code, 1860 \u00a0 HERE<\/a><\/h3>\n

\"penal<\/a><\/p>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Holding Asian Paints as ‘victim’ within CrPC, the Court further stated that victim’s right to prefer appeal under Proviso to S. 372 CrPC is not restricted by any other provision of the CrPC.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":354302,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,9],"tags":[8991,34679,32271,80330,55017,33444,3728],"class_list":["post-354287","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-supremecourt","tag-appeal","tag-asian-paints","tag-counterfeit-products","tag-ipr-violation","tag-justice-ahsanuddin-amanullah","tag-right-to-appeal","tag-Victim"],"yoast_head":"\nSC on company as 'victim' under CrPC | SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"Holding company as 'victim' under CrPC, SC opined that its right to appeal under proviso to S. 372 CrPC is not restricted by other provisions of CrPC.\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/07\/23\/supreme-court-holds-company-as-victim-under-crpc-legal-news\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Know why Supreme Court held this Company as \u2018victim\u2019 within the ambit of S. 2(wa) read with Proviso to S. 372 CrPC?\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Holding company as 'victim' under CrPC, SC opined that its right to appeal under proviso to S. 372 CrPC is not restricted by other provisions of CrPC.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/07\/23\/supreme-court-holds-company-as-victim-under-crpc-legal-news\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SCC Times\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2025-07-23T08:30:38+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2025-07-24T12:45:12+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/Company-as-victim-under-CrPC.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"886\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"590\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Sucheta\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:title\" content=\"Know why Supreme Court held this Company as \u2018victim\u2019 within the ambit of S. 2(wa) read with Proviso to S. 372 CrPC?\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Sucheta\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"8 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/07\/23\/supreme-court-holds-company-as-victim-under-crpc-legal-news\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/07\/23\/supreme-court-holds-company-as-victim-under-crpc-legal-news\/\",\"name\":\"SC on company as 'victim' under CrPC | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/07\/23\/supreme-court-holds-company-as-victim-under-crpc-legal-news\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/07\/23\/supreme-court-holds-company-as-victim-under-crpc-legal-news\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/Company-as-victim-under-CrPC.webp\",\"datePublished\":\"2025-07-23T08:30:38+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2025-07-24T12:45:12+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/7416b8c43cd3a0a3412cf97fc17b54fa\"},\"description\":\"Holding company as 'victim' under CrPC, SC opined that its right to appeal under proviso to S. 372 CrPC is not restricted by other provisions of CrPC.\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/07\/23\/supreme-court-holds-company-as-victim-under-crpc-legal-news\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/07\/23\/supreme-court-holds-company-as-victim-under-crpc-legal-news\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/07\/23\/supreme-court-holds-company-as-victim-under-crpc-legal-news\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/Company-as-victim-under-CrPC.webp\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/Company-as-victim-under-CrPC.webp\",\"width\":886,\"height\":590,\"caption\":\"Company as victim under CrPC\"},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/07\/23\/supreme-court-holds-company-as-victim-under-crpc-legal-news\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Know why Supreme Court held this Company as \u2018victim\u2019 within the ambit of S. 2(wa) read with Proviso to S. 372 CrPC?\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\",\"name\":\"SCC Times\",\"description\":\"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/7416b8c43cd3a0a3412cf97fc17b54fa\",\"name\":\"Sucheta\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/530d4c250404c869212316d6351878b83f86bf27648031b1e6d4857a4bae4b88?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/530d4c250404c869212316d6351878b83f86bf27648031b1e6d4857a4bae4b88?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Sucheta\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/legal_editor\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"SC on company as 'victim' under CrPC | SCC Times","description":"Holding company as 'victim' under CrPC, SC opined that its right to appeal under proviso to S. 372 CrPC is not restricted by other provisions of CrPC.","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/07\/23\/supreme-court-holds-company-as-victim-under-crpc-legal-news\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Know why Supreme Court held this Company as \u2018victim\u2019 within the ambit of S. 2(wa) read with Proviso to S. 372 CrPC?","og_description":"Holding company as 'victim' under CrPC, SC opined that its right to appeal under proviso to S. 372 CrPC is not restricted by other provisions of CrPC.","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/07\/23\/supreme-court-holds-company-as-victim-under-crpc-legal-news\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2025-07-23T08:30:38+00:00","article_modified_time":"2025-07-24T12:45:12+00:00","og_image":[{"width":886,"height":590,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/Company-as-victim-under-CrPC.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Sucheta","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_title":"Know why Supreme Court held this Company as \u2018victim\u2019 within the ambit of S. 2(wa) read with Proviso to S. 372 CrPC?","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Sucheta","Est. reading time":"8 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/07\/23\/supreme-court-holds-company-as-victim-under-crpc-legal-news\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/07\/23\/supreme-court-holds-company-as-victim-under-crpc-legal-news\/","name":"SC on company as 'victim' under CrPC | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/07\/23\/supreme-court-holds-company-as-victim-under-crpc-legal-news\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/07\/23\/supreme-court-holds-company-as-victim-under-crpc-legal-news\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/Company-as-victim-under-CrPC.webp","datePublished":"2025-07-23T08:30:38+00:00","dateModified":"2025-07-24T12:45:12+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/7416b8c43cd3a0a3412cf97fc17b54fa"},"description":"Holding company as 'victim' under CrPC, SC opined that its right to appeal under proviso to S. 372 CrPC is not restricted by other provisions of CrPC.","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/07\/23\/supreme-court-holds-company-as-victim-under-crpc-legal-news\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/07\/23\/supreme-court-holds-company-as-victim-under-crpc-legal-news\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/07\/23\/supreme-court-holds-company-as-victim-under-crpc-legal-news\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/Company-as-victim-under-CrPC.webp","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/Company-as-victim-under-CrPC.webp","width":886,"height":590,"caption":"Company as victim under CrPC"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/07\/23\/supreme-court-holds-company-as-victim-under-crpc-legal-news\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Know why Supreme Court held this Company as \u2018victim\u2019 within the ambit of S. 2(wa) read with Proviso to S. 372 CrPC?"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/","name":"SCC Times","description":"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/7416b8c43cd3a0a3412cf97fc17b54fa","name":"Sucheta","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/530d4c250404c869212316d6351878b83f86bf27648031b1e6d4857a4bae4b88?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/530d4c250404c869212316d6351878b83f86bf27648031b1e6d4857a4bae4b88?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Sucheta"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/legal_editor\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/Company-as-victim-under-CrPC.webp","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":375720,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/02\/16\/acquittal-in-cheque-dishonour-complainant-challenge-appeal-not-revision-ker-hc\/","url_meta":{"origin":354287,"position":0},"title":"Cheque dishonour complainant is a ‘victim’; Acquittal must be challenged by appeal, not revision: Kerala HC","author":"Sunaina","date":"February 16, 2026","format":false,"excerpt":"\u201cA complainant under Section 138 of the NI Act is a victim as defined in Section 2(wa) CrPC as the expression 'victim' includes not only the person who has suffered any loss or injury caused by reason of any act or omission for which the accused person has been charged,\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Acquittal in cheque dishonour case","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/Acquittal-in-cheque-dishonour-case.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/Acquittal-in-cheque-dishonour-case.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/Acquittal-in-cheque-dishonour-case.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/Acquittal-in-cheque-dishonour-case.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":6767,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2015\/08\/12\/restrictive-interpretation-of-victim-and-legal-heir-in-the-light-of-sections-2-wa-and-372-of-crpc-overruled\/","url_meta":{"origin":354287,"position":1},"title":"Restrictive interpretation of \u201cvictim\u201d and \u201clegal heir\u201d in the light of sections 2(wa) and 372 of CrPC, overruled","author":"Sucheta","date":"August 12, 2015","format":false,"excerpt":"Delhi High Court: \u00a0In reference of a matter to Full Bench concerning locus standi of private parties to maintain appeals by virtue of the proviso to Section 372 CrPC. The Court overruled its previous view decided in Chattar Singh v. Subhash \u00a02011 SCC OnLine Del 81 : (2011) 123 DRJ\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "High Courts"","block_context":{"text":"High Courts","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/highcourts\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/scc-blog_Page_9.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/scc-blog_Page_9.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/scc-blog_Page_9.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/scc-blog_Page_9.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/scc-blog_Page_9.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":222761,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/12\/03\/del-hc-s-372-crpc-does-not-entitle-the-victim-to-file-an-appeal-against-inadequate-sentence-restated\/","url_meta":{"origin":354287,"position":2},"title":"Del HC | S. 372 CrPC does not entitle the victim to file an appeal against inadequate sentence restated","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"December 3, 2019","format":false,"excerpt":"Delhi High Court:\u00a0A Division Bench of Manmohan and Sangita Dhingra Sehgal, JJ., held that the appeal filed by the complainant (father of the deceased victim) against the judgment of the trial court, challenging the inadequacy of sentence awarded to the convict, was not maintainable. The convict was sentenced to life\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":213995,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/04\/26\/bom-hc-victims-right-to-appeal-against-acquittal-of-accused-upheld-in-light-of-amendment-to-s-372-crpc\/","url_meta":{"origin":354287,"position":3},"title":"Bom HC | Victim’s right to appeal against acquittal of accused upheld in light of amendment to S. 372 CrPC","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"April 26, 2019","format":false,"excerpt":"Bombay High Court:\u00a0M.G. Giratkar, J. quashed an order passed by the Additional Sessions Judge wherein the victim's (applicant's) appeal against the acquittal of the accused was dismissed as not maintainable. The accused was prosecuted for the offences punishable under Sections 354-A, 354-D, 323 and 506 IPC. He was, however, acquitted\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":214931,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/05\/22\/gau-hc-s-372-crpc-appeal-against-order-of-assistant-sessions-judge-lies-in-the-court-of-sessions-judge-whether-the-impugned-order-pertains-to-conviction-or-not\/","url_meta":{"origin":354287,"position":4},"title":"Gau HC | S. 372 CrPC: Appeal against order of Assistant Sessions Judge lies in the Court of Sessions Judge, whether the impugned order pertains to conviction or not","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"May 22, 2019","format":false,"excerpt":"Gauhati High Court: Rumi Kumari Phukan, J. dismissed an application seeking leave to appeal against an Assistant Sessions Judge\u2019s order of acquittal, holding that the forum for preferring such an appeal would be the Court of Sessions Judge and not the High Court.\u00a0 The petitioner (herein) in the instant case\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":107851,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2017\/02\/20\/conflicting-opinions-on-victims-right-to-appeal-matter-referred-to-a-larger-bench\/","url_meta":{"origin":354287,"position":5},"title":"Conflicting opinions on victim\u2019s right to appeal; matter referred to a larger Bench","author":"Saba","date":"February 20, 2017","format":false,"excerpt":"Allahabad High Court: Whether the victim in a criminal complaint case against the acquittal\u00a0order can prefer appeal before the Sessions Judge or such appeal would lie before the High Court\u00a0under Section 372 CrPC or with the leave of Court under Section 378(4) CrPC \u2013 this was the\u00a0matter under consideration in\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/354287","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=354287"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/354287\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/354302"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=354287"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=354287"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=354287"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}