Back
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
A.K. PATNAIK AND SUDHANSU JYOTI MUKHOPADHAYA, JJ.
NIRANJAN LAL CHHIPA - Appellant
VERSUS
AJAY KUMAR JOSHI & ORS. - Respondents
Criminal Appeal No. 594 of 2013 (Special Leave Petition(Crl.)No.7550 of 2012)
Decided on 15-4-2013
Hearing - Criminal Revision Petition - The court set aside the impugned order and remanded the matter back to the High Court for fresh hearing and disposal.
Fact of the Case:
The High Court quashed the order passed by the Sessions Judge without granting a hearing to the appellant, who was impleaded as a respondent in the Criminal Revision Petition.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the appellant was not given a hearing by the High Court before it passed the impugned order, leading to the setting aside of the order and remanding the matter back to the High Court for fresh hearing and disposal.
Issues: Lack of hearing granted to the appellant in the Criminal Revision Petition before the High Court.
Ratio Decidendi: The failure to grant a hearing to the appellant before passing the impugned order led to the setting aside of the order and remanding the matter back to the High Court for fresh hearing and disposal.
Final Decision: The Criminal Appeal was allowed, and the impugned order was set aside, remanding the matter back to the High Court for fresh hearing and disposal.
ORDER
1. Leave granted.
2. We have heard learned counsel for the parties.
3. By the impugned judgment, the High Court has quashed the order dated 30.06.2012 passed by the Sessions Judge (Fast Track) Bandikui, District Dausa and directed the Sessions Judge to decide the Revision Petition filed against the order dated 19.05.2012 of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dausa in connection with F.I.R.No.561 of 2011.
4. The main grievance of the appellant is that before the impugned order was passed by the High Court quashing the order passed by the Sessions Judge in his favour, no hearing was granted to the appellant, though he was impleaded as respondent in the Criminal Revision Petition before the High Court.
5. Considering the fact that the appellant was not given a hearing by the High Court before it passed the impugned order, we set aside the impugned order dated 26.07.2012 of the High Court passed in S.B.Criminal Revision Petition No.737 of 2012 and remand the matter back to the High Court for its fresh hearing and disposal.
Criminal Appeal is allowed accordingly.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
