- (1.) An application has been moved for recalling the order dated 02.12.2011 passed by this court. The order dated 02.12.2011 is as under:- "The learned counsel for the appellant pleads that under the amended Section 372 Cr.P.C., by which a proviso has been added, and the right to file an appeal has been granted to a victim, he seeks to file an appeal before the learned District & Sessions Judge. However, his anxiety is that he may be hit by limitation, as it is an appeal being filed by the complainant against an order of acquittal passed by the learned Magistrate. The liberty to file an appeal before the concerned Sessions Judge is, hereby, granted. Since the present appeal has been filed before the wrong forum, the time taken in pursuing the remedy before the High Court shall be considered while deciding the point of limitation by the learned Sessions Judge. These appeals, hereby, stand disposed of."
(2.) Mr.S.R.Surana, the learned senior counsel for the applicant, has contended that the case was between the complainant, M/s.Shiva International, and the accused-applicant, Rajesh Verma. Since it was a criminal case under Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act, the State of Rajasthan was stranger to the case. Moreover, on behalf of the accused-applicant-respondent, the counsel had already filed his power. Yet on 02.12.2011, in the absence of the counsel for the accused-applicant, the order has been passed. Therefore, the principles of natural justice have been violated. Therefore, the order dated 02.12.2011 deserves to be recalled. On the other hand, Mr.Ashwin Garg, the learned counsel for the complainant-appellant, has contended that the power of review does not vest in this court under the Criminal Procedure Code. Hence, once the judgment has been signed, it cannot be reviewed by this court.
(3.) Secondly, merely because the order has been passed in absence of the learned counsel for the accused would not tantamount to violating the principles of natural justice. For, the name of the counsel was shown in the cause list and the counsel should have attended his case when called upon by this court. In case he failed to do so, he did it at his own peril.;