M.Katju, Umeshwar Pandey - (1.) -This special appeal has been filed against the judgment of the learned single Judge dated 28.5.2004.
(2.) HEARD learned counsel for the parties. The facts of the case are given in great detail in the judgment of the learned single Judge, and hence we are not repeating the same. We are only considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the appellant. The first submission is that the charge-sheet given to the appellant was in English but the appellant knows only Hindi. This submission does not appear to have been made before the learned single Judge as there is no reference to the same in the impugned judgment.
(3.) IT is well-settled that there is a presumption that a single Judge deals with all the points which are pressed before him and if a point is not referred in the judgment then the presumption is that the point was never pressed before the learned single Judge vide State of Maharashtra v. Ramdas Shrinivas Nayak, AIR 1982 SC 1249. IT often happens that several grounds are taken in the writ petition or appeal but only some of them are pressed by counsel at the hearing. Hence the Judge deals only with the points which are pressed before him. If the learned counsel urges that the point was in fact pressed before the learned single Judge but it was not considered by him then the counsel should approach the same learned single Judge, and if he convinces him that point was in fact pressed but not considered, it is open to the learned single Judge to consider that point also.;