AdvocateKhoj
Login : Advocate | Client
Home Post Your Case My Account Law College Law Library
    

Report No. 89

Chapter 41

Articles 114 To 117: Appeals

41.1. Article 114.- Article 114 reads as unde.-"114. Appeal from an order of acquitta.-

(a) under sub-section (1) or sub-section (2) of section 417 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898.1

Ninety days.

The date of the order appealed from.
(b) under sub-section (3) of section 417 of that Code.2

Thirty days.

The date of the giant of special leave."

1. Cf. now section 378(1) and (2), Cr. P.C., 1973.

2. Cf. now section 378(4) Cr. P.C., 1973.

In the Act of 1908, Article 157 read as unde.-

"157. Under the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898, from an order of acquittal.

Six months.

The date of the appealed from."

In the Act of 1877, the parallel provision was found in Article 157, which read as unde.-

"157. Under the Code of Criminal Procedure from a judgment of acquittal.

Six months.

The date of the judgment appealed against."

The Law Commission1, in its Report on the Act of 1908, noted that the periods provided for appeals in England were shorter, in contrast with the period of three months allowed, by Article 157 of the Act of 1908 (as amended in 1955). The Commission did not recommend a general reduction of the period for appeals. But it recommended a limitation period of one month in the case of an appeal against acquittal by a private party with special leave.

1. Law Commission of India, 3rd Report (Limitation Act, 1908), paras. 166-167 and Article 39.

41.2. Recommendation to make verbal change.- While we do not propose any changes of substance in this article, a verbal change is necessary in view of the passing of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, which repeals and re-enacts the Code of 1898, referred to in the article. For the reference in the article to sub-sections (1) and (2) of section 417, a reference to sub-sections (1) and (2) of section 378 should be substituted, and for the reference to sub-section (3) of section 417, a reference to sub-section (4) of section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 should be substituted1, these being the provisions of the new Code corresponding to those of the Code of 1898.

1. For the earlier history of section 417, Cr. P.C., see Kaushalya Rani v. Gopal Singh, AIR 1964 SC 260 (262).

41.3.Article 115.- The next article is also concerned with appeals under the Code or Criminal Procedure and reads as unde.-

"115. Under the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898

(a) From a sentence of death passed by a court of session or by High Court in the exercise of its original criminal jurisdiction.

Thirty days.

The date of the sentence.
(b) From any other sentence or any order not being an order of acquittal-
(i) to the High Court.

Sixty days.

The date of the sentence or order.
(ii) to any other court.

Thirty days.

The date of the sentence or order."

This article corresponds to Articles 150, 150A, 154 and 155 of the Act of 1908. They read as unde.-

"150. Under the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898, from a sentence of death passed by a court of Session or by a High Court in the exercise of its original criminal jurisdiction.

Seven days.

The date of the sentence.
150A. Under the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898, from fa finding rejecting a claim under section 443 of that Code.

Seven days.

The date of the finding.
154 Under of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898, to any court other tan a High Court.

Thirty days.

The date of the sentence or order appealed from.
155 Under the same Code to a High Court, except in the cases provided for by Article 150 and Article 157.

Sixty days.

The date of the sentence or order appealed from."

The Law Commission1, in its Report on the Act of 1908, recommended that the period of seven days available under Articles 150 and 150A of the Act of 1908 (Death sentence) should be increased to thirty days. This recommendation has been accepted. The Commission also recommended a uniform period of 30 days irrespective of the for.-a recommendation which has not been carried out.

1. Law Commission of India, 3rd Report (Limitation Act, 1908), para. 163.

41.4. Recommendation as to Article 115.- The reference in this article to the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898, should now be revised and a reference to the present Code of 1973 should be substituted in the opening part of the article. We recommend that Article 115 should be so amended.

41.5.Article 116.- This takes us to Article 116, which provides for limitation for civil appeals as unde.-

"116. Under the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908-
(a) to a High Court from any decree or order;

Ninety days.

The date of the decree or order..
(b) to any other Court from any decree or order.

Thirty days.

The date of the decree or order."

The corresponding Articles in the Act of 1908 were 156 and 152, which read as unde.-

"156. Under the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, to a High Court, except tin cases provided for by article 151 and Article 153. Ninth days. The date of the decree or order appealed from.
152 Under the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, to the Court of a District Judge.

Thirty days.

The date of the decree or order appealed from."

Appeals under the Code of Civil Procedure, provided for in Articles 156 and 152 of the Act of 1908, had different periods of limitation; a larger period of ninety days for appeals to High Courts and a shorter period of thirty days for appeals to the court of a District Judge. The Law Commission1, in its Report on that Act, took the view that in the light of improvement in the means of quick transport enabling the litigant to undertake travel to the seat of the High Court, the period of ninety days was unrealistic and should be reduced to thirty days.

The Limitation Bill, 1962, as introduced, sought to implement this recommendation. However, when the matter came up before the Joint Committee, the Committee accepted an amendment moved by an Honourable Member (Shri S.K. Basu) which, sought to retain the period of ninety days. That is how Article 116 (combining the earlier Articles 156 and 152) came to be enacted in the present form.

1. Law Commission of India, 3rd Report (Limitation Act, 1908), para. 165.

41.6.Recommendation as to Article 116.- We should reiterate the earlier recommendation of the Law Commission for reduction of the period for appeal to the High Court to thirty days. Reduction of the period is justified for the reasons given in the Report on the earlier Act. It may, to some extent, also help to reduce the number of appeals to the High Court, since a shorter period might dissuade a wavering appellant from taking a chance.

41.7.Article 117.- This takes us to Article 117, which reads as unde.-

"117. From a decree or order or any High Court to the same Court Thirty days. The do the decree or order."

Article 151 of the Acts of 1908 and 1877 read as unde.-

"151. From a decree or order of Judicature at Fort William [Madras] [and Bombay, or of the High Court of East Punjab] in the exercise of its original jurisdiction. Twenty days. The do the decree or order."

Increase of the period from 20 days to 30 days was recommended by the Law Commission in its Report on the Act of 19.-which also recommended a uniform period for all High Courts.1 The recommendation has been carried out. The Commission observed that the then existing period (20 days) was too short "and attempts are often made to get an extended period by first applying for leave to appeal as a pauper (for which a period of 30 days) is provided and then, on failure to obtain such leave, to ask for time for payment of court fee, the delay in such payment being excused by the Court".

No further change is needed in the article.

1. Law Commission of India, 3rd Report (Limitation Act, 1908), para. 164.



The Limitation Act, 1963 Back




Client Area | Advocate Area | Blogs | About Us | User Agreement | Privacy Policy | Advertise | Media Coverage | Contact Us | Site Map
powered and driven by neosys