A judge who has previously framed charges in the same case must recuse from hearing the appeal; having expressed intent to withdraw, he cannot later pass judgment. Passing a judgment on the date fixed for arguments, without affording opportunity, violates natural justice and constitutes arbitrariness.

ORDER

Heard Mr.C.Christopher, learned Counsel for Revision Petitioners and Mr.A.Thiruvadi Kumar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for Respondent.

2. The present Criminal Revision Petition has been filed to set aside the judgment passed in C.A.No.124 of 2023, dated 02.09.2024 by Additional District (Fast Track) Court, Theni confirmed the conviction passed in S.C.No.150 of 2015, dated 04.09.2023 by Assistant Session Cum Chief Judicial Magistrate, Theni primarily on the ground that impugned order suffers from violation of principles of natural justice.

3. At the outset, it is made clear that I do not propose to examine the merits of the case and hence, I do not propose to advert to the findings rendered by the Courts below nor do I intend to examine to venture to examine the legality or correctness of the ultimate conclusion, but propose to confine the challenge to the impugned judgment on the ground of violation of principles of natural justice. Having said that, for the purpose of a broad overview, I shall set out very briefly the facts.

4. The case of prosecution is that 1^st petitioner/A1 was in a relationship with one Subashini. Subashini's marriage was fixed with one Venkatesan, brother of P.W.1. On 17.10.2013 at 7.30 PM, 1^st petitioner/A1 came in a motor bike along with 2^nd petitioner/A2 and waylaid P.W.1. While 2^nd petitioner/A2 caught hold of P.W.1, 1^st petitioner/A1 stabbed P.W.1 with a knife on his stomach, back, right hand elbow and finger and caused injuries. On the complaint given by P.W.1, a case was registered in Crime No.493 of 2013 for offences under Section 341, 324 and 307 of IPC against petitioners/A1 and A2. Thereafter, offences were altered to Sections 120(b), 341, 342, 307, 307 r/w 34 of IPC. On completion of investigation, respondent Police laid a charge sheet arraigning 1^st petitioner's mother as A3 and the same was taken on file in S.C.No.150 of 2015 on the file of Assistant Sessions cum Chief Judicial Magistrate, Theni. All the accused were acquitted by trial Court of the offence under Section 120 (b) IPC and further acquitted the petitioner's mother of all offences. Trial Court convicted the petitioners for offences under Sections 307, 341, 342 and 307 r/w 34 of IPC and sentenced them as follows:

(i) 1^st petitioner/A1 has to undergo one month simple imprisonment for offence under Section 341 of IPC;

(ii) 1^st petitioner/A1 has to undergo 7 years rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.1000/-, in default, to undergo one month simple imprisonment for offence under Section 307 of IPC;

(iii) 2^nd petitioner/A2 has to undergo one month simple imprisonment for offence under Section 341 of IPC;

(iv) 2^nd petitioner/A2 has to undergo one month simple imprisonment for offence under Section 342 of IPC;

(v) 2^nd petitioner/A2 has to undergo 7 years rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.1000/-, in default, to undergo one month simple imprisonment for offence under Section 307 r/w 34 of IPC.

4.1. Aggrieved by the judgment of the Trial Court, 1^st petitioner preferred an appeal before Additional District (Fast Track) Court, Theni in C.A.No.124 of 2023. The Lower Appellate Court by judgment dated 02.09.2024 confirmed the judgment of conviction and sentence passed by the Trial Court. Challenging the same, present Criminal Revision Case has been filed.

5. The matter came up for hearing on 13.08.2024, Mr.S.Gopinathan, the Appellate Judge presiding over the Additional District (Fast Track) Court, Theni. The Appellate Judge then observed that he framed charges on 03.02.2023, while serving as Chief Judicial Magistrate, Theni, thus referred the matter to the Principal District Judge, Theni for withdrawal and posted on 02.09.2024, “for arguments”.

6. Learned counsel for petitioners would submit that a perusal of the E-Court records reveal that Presiding Officer Mr.S.Gopinathan intended to recuse himself, as he had presided as Chief Judicial Magistrate, Theni and framed charges on 03.02.2023. However, the impugned judgment c