Madhya Pradesh High Court
Shivendra Singh Chauhan vs Rajkumar Sharma on 13 December, 2023
Author: Milind Ramesh Phadke
Bench: Milind Ramesh Phadke
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MILIND RAMESH PHADKE
ON THE 13 th OF DECEMBER, 2023
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 7302 of 2023
BETWEEN:-
SHIVENDRA SINGH CHAUHAN S/O SHRI KRISHNPAL
SINGH CHAUHAN, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS,
OCCUPATION: BUSINESS KUNJ VIHAR COLONY GOLE
KA MANDIR (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....APPLICANT
(BY SHRI HARSHVARDHAN TOPRE - ADVOCATE)
AND
RAJKUMAR SHARMA S/O SARYU PRASAD SHARMA
YADAV DHARM KANTA A B ROAD SHARDA VIDHYA
NIKETAN KE PAAS (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(BY SHRI ANAND PUROHIT - ADVOCATE)
This application coming on for admission this day, the court passed the
following:
ORDER
The present petition, under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure, has been filed against the order dated 16.01.2023 passed by the
Coordinate Bench of this Court in Criminal Revision No.542 of 2010 whereby,
while dismissing the revision preferred by the petitioner, the judgments passed
by the Courts below in RT No.731 of 2008 and Criminal Appeal No.186 of
2010 were affirmed.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the order impugned
needs to be recalled/modified on the ground that the said order was passed in
absence of the counsel for the petitioner, as he was out of the station on that
date and therefore could not argue the matter and the Court without
accommodating the counsel has passed the said order on merits.
3. It was further submitted that from bare perusal of the impugned order,
it would be evident that no reasoning has been assigned while dismissing the
criminal revision on merits, therefore, in the light of order passed by the Hon'ble
Supreme Court in the matter of Taj Mohammad Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh
& Another reported in 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 689, the present petition deserves
to be allowed and the impugned order under challenge requires to be recalled
and the criminal revision be restored to its original number and thereafter, it be
heard on merits.
4. Per contra, Counsel for the respodnent submits that the present
petition under Section 482 of CrPC is not maintainable in the wake of
provisions of Section 362 of the CrPC wherein once the judgment or final order
disposing of case, has been signed by the Court it cannot be altered or
reviewed except to correct a clerical and arithmetical error and since none of the
eventualities arises, the present petition is not maintainable and therefore, be
dismissed.
5. After hearing rival contentions and going through the record as well as
the provisions of Section 362 of CrPC, this Court finds that the order dated
16.01.2023 has been passed after considering the merits of the matter and
Section 362 of the CrPC creates a specific bar that once the judgment or final
order disposing of case, has been signed by the Court it cannot be altered or
reviewed in any manner except to correct a clerical and arithmetical error.
6. It is not the case of the petitioner that the matter has been dismissed
for want of prosecution, as the counsel for the petitioner was not available on
that date, rather the petitioner wants to recall the order which has been passed
on merits which is not permissible under the law and remedy available to the
petitioner is to challenge the impugned order before the higher forum.
7. So far as judgment cited by counsel for the petitioner in the matter of
Taj Mohammad Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh (supra), the Hon'ble Supreme
Court in para 6 has held that even in the absence of a party or his counsel, a
revision petition calls for consideration on merits in accordance with the
parameters for consideration of a revision petition, which goes to show that if
the matter has been considered on merits, the same becomes final and cannot
be recalled or reviewed, thus the aforesaid judgment doesn't come to the rescue
the present petitioner.
8. Accordingly, the present petition being devoid of any substance is
hereby dismissed.
(MILIND RAMESH PHADKE)
JUDGE
pwn*
