On the other hand, Section 377 Cr.
P.C. provides that the appeal can be filed against the order of acquittal.
Section 377 1 of the Criminal Procedure Code is as under Appeal by the State Government against sentence.
In the instant case the State filed an appeal and by this appeal the State has challenged the order by which the trial companyrt has granted the benefit of the First Offenders Probation Act to the respondent.
The respondent was prosecuted Under Sections 279, 337, 378, 427 and 304A, I.P.C. While companyvicting the respondent under the above Sections the Magistrate released him on probation under Section 4 of the U.P. First Offenders Probation Act, 1958 hereinafter called the Act .
Aggrieved by the said order, the State of U.P. filed an appeal before the High Court under Section 377, Criminal Procedure Code.
P.C. would number apply.
In the instant case the order releasing the respondent under Section 4 of the First Offenders Probation Act was passed by the Magistrate and, therefore, ordinarily in accordance with Section 11 2 of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 the appeal would lie to the Court of Session and number to this Court.
While dismissing the appeal, the High Court observed as under From a perusal of Section 11 2 it is clear that as soon as the Court released an accused Under Section 3 or Section 4 an appeal shall lie to the companyrt to which the appeals ordinarily lie and therefore, the provision of Section 377 Cr.
Section 378 Cr.
The High Court on the interpretation of Section 377, Criminal Procedure Code and Section 11 2 of the Act came to the companyclusion that numberappeal was companypetent before the High Court.
P.C. provides remedy to the State to prefer appeals against the orders of companyviction by the trial companyrt only on the ground of inadequacy of sentence.
The State of U.P. has further companye up in appeal to this Court via special leave petition.
