Contact us   Feedback   Annual Subscription   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

2008 (2) TMI 914 - SUPREME COURT

2008 (2) TMI 914 - SUPREME COURT - 2008 (3) SCC 509 - Criminal Appeal No. 257 OF 2008 - Dated:- 4-2-2008 - Dr. ARIJIT PASAYAT AND P. SATHASIVAM JJ. JUDGMENT: Dr. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J. 1. Leave granted. 2. Challenge in this appeal is to the order passed by a learned Single Judge of Himachal Pradesh High Court dismissing the Revision Petition filed by the appellant under Section 397 read with Section 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (in short the 'Code'). 3. Background facts in a n .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ead of constructing a road for which sanction was received. Thereafter, the work on the sanctioned project commenced. On 13.10.2003 when the construction was in progress, the respondents came to the work site at about 4.30 p.m. and abused the complainant in filthy and derogatory language and threatened her with dire consequences. They forcibly obstructed the appellant and the labourers from doing any work on the village road. They caused hurt to the appellant and by using criminal force pushed h .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

persons. On 28.9.2004, learned Executive Magistrate directed the file to be consigned by holding that the Kalandara had become time barred and no further action was required. Appellant made a grievance that no notice of the proceedings was given to her and neither she nor her advocate was heard before the passing of the order. An application was filed on 20.7.2005 by the accused persons praying for dropping charges with a contention that the applicants cannot be tried for the same offence. Refer .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

s against applicants 1 and 2 namely, Hem Raj and Swroop Chand on the ground that the said applicants cannot be tried for the same offence. Being aggrieved by the aforesaid order passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Criminal Revision Petition was filed which was numbered as Criminal Revision No.111 of 2006. By the impugned order, the revision was dismissed in summary manner. 4. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that after issuance of summons the learned Magistrate ought n .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

no merit in the revision petition, the High Court has rightly dismissed the revision petition summarily. 6. The order of the High Court reads as follows: "Heard. Dismissed". It is absolutely non-reasoned. Reasons introduce clarity in an order. On plainest consideration of justice, the High Court ought to have set forth its reasons, howsoever brief, in its order indicative of an application of its mind. The absence of reasons has rendered the High Court's judgment unsustainable. 7. .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 



|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version