Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

CHOUTH MAL AND ANR versus BADRI NARAIN AND ORS

High Court of Rajasthan

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


CHOUTH MAL AND ANR v BADRI NARAIN AND ORS - CRLR Case No. 385 of 2004 [2007] RD-RJ 181 (9 January 2007)

(1)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN

AT JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR

ORDER

S.B. CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO. 385/2004

CHOUTH MAL & ANR. Vs. BADRI NARAIN & ORS.

DATE: 09.04.2007.

HON'BLE MR. K.S. RATHORE, J.

Mr. Pankaj Gupta for the complainant-petitioners.

Mr. B.S. Chhaba, Public Prosecutor for the State.

Dr. Mahesh Sharma for the respondents.

****

The present criminal revision petition under

Section 397 r/w Section 401 Cr.P.C. is preferred by the complainant-petitioners against the order dated 05.03.2004 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge,

Dausa in Criminal Revision Petition Nos. 11/2004 and 20/2004, whereby the revision petitions filed by the respondents have been allowed and the cognizance order dated 22.10.2003 passed by the Judicial Magistrate,

Dausa in Criminal Misc. Case No. 942/2003 has been reversed and quashed and set-aside.

I have considered the rival submissions of the respective parties, carefully perused Section 401(2)

Cr.P.C. and have also gone through the judgment rendered by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Hazi Mohd. Shafi Vs. State of Rajasthan & Anr. reported in 2002(1) R.Cr.D. 172 (Raj.), wherein this

(2)

Court has held that without affording opportunity to the petitioner, complainant, if being heard, Court committed apparent error.

Here in the instant case, without imleading the complainant as party in the revision petition, the

Revisional Court without giving opportunity of being heard to the complainant, has passed the order impugned dated 05.03.2004 and thus, the Revisional Court has committed an error apparent on the face of the record.

Consequently, the order of the Revisional

Court i.e. Additional Sessions Judge, Dausa dated 05.03.2004 is herewith quashed and set-aside and the matter is remanded back to the Revisional Court for fresh adjudication as per the provisions of Section 401

(2) Cr.P.C. and the ratio decided by this Court in the aforementioned case and then pass fresh order.

The respondents may move application before the Revisional Court to convert the arrest warrants into bailable warrants.

With these observations, the revision petition stands disposed of.

Record be sent back forthwith.

(K.S. RATHORE),J. /KKC/


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.