- (1.) This application has been filed for expunging the remarks made against the applicant in the judgment and order dated 25 February 2015 rendered by a Division Bench of this Court in Criminal Appeal No.1150 of 2011 (Hoshiyar Singh Vs. State). The aforesaid Criminal Appeal No.1150 of 2011 had been filed by the appellant against the judgment given on 6 May 2011 by the applicant in Sessions Trial No.1382 of 2009 (State Vs. Hoshiyar Singh). The appellant was convicted and sentenced by the applicant under Section 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 read with Section 120-B IPC; under Section 302 IPC read with Section 120-B IPC, under Section 364 IPC read with Section 120-B IPC, under Section 201 IPC read with Section 109 IPC, under Section 342 IPC read with Section 120-B IPC and under Section 7 Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1932 read with Section 120-B IPC.
(2.) The judgment in the Criminal Appeal was rendered by a Bench comprising Hon'ble Mr. Justice Imtiyaz Murtaza and Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ritu Raj Awasthi on 25 February 2015. While allowing the appeal, the Division Bench observed: "In the above case, after acquittal of other accused persons, single person was also acquitted under Section 120-B IPC, and by this reckoning, we are of the opinion that in the instant case, only appellant could not be convicted under Section 120-B IPC when no other person has been charged alongwith him under the said Section. Ultimately, Sri I.B. Singh, Senior Advocate fairly conceded that a single person cannot be convicted under Section 120B IPC. Under Section 120B IPC, prior agreement between two or more persons is necessary. In the instant case there is no finding or evidence in this regard that appellant had entered into agreement with any other person. Therefore, appellant alone cannot be convicted under Section 120B IPC and he is entitled to acquittal. It is distressing that we have set at liberty an accused person for the indiscretion of the court below. An accused person whose involvement in extending uncanny help to the accused persons is writ large in the facts and circumstances, has gone unscathed without being punished but we are pained, we have no alternative option but to grant acquittal to the accused person. As a result of foregoing conclusion, the appeal is allowed. The judgment and order of the court below dated 6.5.2011 is set aside and the appellant who has been convicted for offences as embodied in the judgment of the trial court is acquitted of the offence under section 120 B IPC. He is in jail. He shall be released forthwith unless wanted in any other case. A copy of the judgment and order of this Court be sent to the trial court for compliance accordingly."
(3.) The judgment and order in Sessions Trial No. 1382 of 2009 dated 6 May 2011 was, accordingly, set aside and the appellant was acquitted of the offence under Section 120-B and was directed to be released forthwith unless wanted in any other case. After having allowed the appeal, the Division Bench also made the following remarks against the applicant:- "Before parting with the judgment, we may mention that the Sessions Judge while being totally negligent and careless during the trial, appears to have evinced his fragmentary knowledge of law that a single person charged or convicted under section 120 B IPC. A senior Judicial officer of his rank is supposed to be versatile on law. It is surprising to notice that he was not acquainted with the relevant law on the point that a single person cannot be charged or convicted under section 120 B IPC. He even did not care to frame appropriate charges with the other accused persons. Candidly enough, the act of the accused was punishable under various Sections enumerated in Chapter XI of the IPC. ............................. Hon'ble the Chief Justice, as per his discretion, if think proper, may send the officer for exhaustive training to be recharged with the nuances of law on the point. A copy of the judgment shall be placed before Hon'ble the Chief Justice for appropriate orders for sending the officer to J.T.R.I. for exhaustive training in law. A copy of the judgment be also sent to the Institute of Judicial Training and Research. .............................";