Intra-court appeals are not maintainable against orders passed under Section 482 CrPC.

The appellant, appearing in person, sought directions for registration of his complaint alleging offences under the Prevention of Corruption Act and Section 120B IPC.

A Single Judge, exercising jurisdiction under Section 482 CrPC, declined to direct registration of an FIR and stated that the appellant could pursue further representations or file a private complaint before the competent court.

The Single Judge later dismissed the appellant’s request to review that order, holding that the High Court had no power to review its order under Section 482 CrPC. The appellant then brought this intra-court appeal, invoking Sections 386(d), 382 and 482 CrPC.

Whether an intra-court appeal lies against a Single Judge’s order made in the exercise of jurisdiction under Section 482 CrPC.

Whether the appellant’s appropriate course, if no action was taken on his complaint, was to file a private complaint before the competent court.

The Court considered Sections 382, 386(d) and 482 CrPC, under which the appellant purported to bring the appeal and the Single Judge had exercised inherent jurisdiction.

It held that an intra-court appeal is not maintainable against a Single Judge’s order passed under Section 482 CrPC.

The Court also endorsed the remedy identified by the Single Judge: where no action is taken on a complaint, the complainant may approach the competent court by filing a private complaint.

The Court referred to G. Prabhakaran v. The Superintendent of Police, Thanjavur, Crl.O.P.(MD) No.13681 of 2018, order dated 20 September 2018, in recounting the Single Judge’s consideration of that precedent.

The challenged orders were made by a Single Judge exercising powers under Section 482 CrPC. The Division Bench therefore held that the attempted intra-court appeal was not maintainable.

It further found no reason to disturb the Single Judge’s identification of the available remedy: if the authorities had not acted on the complaint, the appellant could file a private complaint before the court with jurisdiction.

The Court left the appellant to pursue the remedy of a private complaint before the competent court.