Navalkishor S/O Shyamsunder Soni vs State Of Maharashtra, Through ...
2016 Latest Caselaw 3801 Bom

            J-cwp216.16.odt                                                                                                1/2   


                         IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY




                                                                                                            
                                               NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR




                                                                             
                              CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION No.216 OF 2016


            Navalkishor s/o. Shyamsunder Soni,




                                                                            
            Aged about 49 years,
            Occupation : Business,
            R/o. L302, Ashalakshmi Apartment,
            Ravinagar Square, Nagpur.                                                   :      PETITIONER




                                                          
                               ...VERSUS...

            State of Maharashtra,
                                 
            Through Police Station Officer, 
            Police Station Ambazari, 
                                
            District Nagpur.                                                            :      RESPONDENT


            =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
            Shri J.B. Kasat, Advocate for the Petitioner.
      

            Shri R.S. Nayak, Addl. Public Prosecutor for the Respondent.
            =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
   



                                                          CORAM  :   S.B. SHUKRE, J.

th DATE : 13 JULY, 2016.

ORAL JUDGMENT :

1. Heard finally by consent of learned counsel appearing for

the parties.

2. It is seen from the order dated 2.9.2015, passed by the

Revisional Court that the criminal revision application has been

dismissed in default. In fact, when a revision application is filed, it is

J-cwp216.16.odt 2/2

required to be decided on its own merits and this could be done even in

the absence of revision applicant. Therefore, learned Additional Sessions

Judge ought to have proceeded to decide the application on its own

merits and should not have dismissed the application in default. The

order is illegal and therefore it must go.

3. In the circumstances, this criminal writ petition is allowed.

4. The impugned order dated 2nd September, 2015 is hereby

quashed and set aside.

The matter is remanded back to the Revisional Court for

deciding the revision application being Criminal Revision Application

No.197/2014 afresh in accordance with law.

6. Sufficient opportunity of being heard shall be granted to both

sides.

7. The Revisional Court is requested to decide the application

within two months from the date of receipt of this order.

8. Rule is made absolute in these terms.

JUDGE

okMksns