Back
ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Dr. Dhananjaya Yashwant Chandrachud, CJ., Sunil Ambwani, Vikram Nath, J.
Premwati - Appellant
Versus
State of U.P. - Respondent
Criminal Revision No. 3381 of 2013
Decided On : 17-01-2014
Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. - Interlocutory Order - The Full Bench held that an order made under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. is an interlocutory order and the remedy of revision against such an order is barred under sub-section (2) of Section 397 Cr.P.C.
Fact of the Case:
The learned Single Judge referred a question to the Full Bench regarding the nature of an order made under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. and the remedy of revision against such an order.
Finding of the Court:
The Full Bench found that the issue was squarely covered by its previous judgment and that the learned Single Judge was not justified in making a reference on a matter already settled by the Full Bench.
Issues: The issue was whether an order made under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. is an interlocutory order and whether the remedy of revision against such an order is barred under sub-section (2) of Section 397 Cr.P.C.
Ratio Decidendi: The judgment of the Full Bench in Father Thomas' case (supra) settled the position in law, holding that an order made under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. is an interlocutory order and the remedy of revision against such order is barred under sub-section (2) of Section 397 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
Final Decision: The criminal revision was to be placed before the learned Single Judge for disposal, as the position in law had been settled by the judgment of the Full Bench in Father Thomas' case (supra).
1. In a referring order dated 13 December 2013, the learned Single Judge has referred the following question for decision by the Full Bench:
"Whether an order made under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. is an interlocutory order and remedy of revision against such an order is barred under sub-section (2) of Section 397 Cr.P.C."
In the judgment of a Full Bench of this Court in Father Thomas v. State of U.P. & Anr., (2011) 1 UPLBEC 1 , one of the three questions which were formulated for consideration was as follows:
"(B) Whether an order made under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. is an interlocutory order and remedy of revision against such an order is barred under sub-section (2) of Section 397 Cr.P.C., 1973?"
2. This question has been answered by the Full Bench as follows:
"B. An order made under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. is an interlocutory order and remedy of revision against such order is barred under sub-section (2) of Section 397 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973."
3. The issue is, thus, squarely covered by the judgment of the Full Bench. With respect, the learned Single Judge was not justified in making a reference on a matter which is covered by a direct decision of the Full Bench which, in turn, is based on law laid down by the Supreme Court.
4. In the circumstances, it is not necessary for this Bench to answer the reference, since the position in law has been settled by the judgment of the Full Bench in Father Thomas' case (supra). This criminal revision along with Criminal Revision No. 3410 of 2013 shall now be placed before the learned Single Judge for disposal.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
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
