Usec 372 notice not rcvd R2 n R3 appointing commission

Dear Client,
As per Section 372 of the Criminal Procedure Code, no appeal shall lie from any judgment or order of a Criminal Court except as provided for by this Code or by any other law for the time being in force. Provided that the 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. Section 372 of CrPC categorized three eventualities of appeal against acquittal or for lesser offences or imposing inadequate compensation and it does not give any right to the victim to appeal for enhancement of sentence, whereas it lies only upon the state. As per Section 286 Cr.P.C., either the Metropolitan Magistrate or Judicial Magistrate may be appointed as Commissioner for taking down the evidence of the witness. As per Section 285(1) Cr.P.C no Advocate could be appointed as Commissioner for recording the evidence of the witness/accused and if the witness/accused is within the territories to which this Code extends, the commission shall be directed to the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate or Chief Judicial Magistrate, as the case may be, within whose local jurisdiction the accused/witness is to be found. Non-service of summons to the accused can lead to the issue of a non-bailable warrant by the Court. The Supreme Court observed that apart from exercising its power to quash a criminal case under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the High Court can also exercise powers under Article 226 of the Constitution to quash the criminal case to prevent misuse of the law invoking the extraordinary jurisdiction of the Court to quash an FIR or criminal proceedings initiated by the trial court. So, in the prevailing situation, you need to hire an experienced Advocate to navigate the issue in the right way.