ANIL KUMAR AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND AND ANOTHER
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
Anil Kumar and Others
State of Uttarakhand and another
Click here to view full judgement.
(1.) The Revisionists, by means of present Criminal Revision, seek to quash the impugned order dated 04.11.2008, passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge/1st FTC, Roorkee, District Haridwar, in Criminal Revision No. 204 of 2008, Rajbeer Singh vs. State of Uttarakhand.
(2.) Respondent no. 2 filed an application under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. against seven accused-persons, including the revisionists for the offences of assault and forgery. Application under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. was dismissed by learned Judicial Magistrate, Roorkee, vide order dated 23.04.2008. Aggrieved against the same, Criminal Revision was preferred by respondent no. 2. Criminal Revision No. 204 of 2008 was allowed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, District Haridwar vide order dated 04.11.2008. The order passed by
learned Judicial Magistrate, Roorkee was set aside with the direction upon him to decide the application under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. afresh in the light of the observations made by Additional Sessions Judge, Roorkee, in his order dated 04.11.2008. Aggrieved against the said order, present Criminal Revision was preferred by the revisionists.
(3.) The sole contention of learned counsel for the revisionists is that the Additional Sessions Judge, Roorkee, decided the Criminal Revision without giving them (the revisionists) an opportunity of hearing.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.