Habib Khan vs State Of Rajasthan
2022 Latest Caselaw 12209 Raj

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 6492/2022

Habib Khan S/o Pathan, Aged About 34 Years, B/c Muslim R/o Vill. Jaloda Ps Lohawat Dist. Jodhpur

----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp

----Respondent

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Aziz Khan For Respondent(s) : Mr. Gaurav Singh, PP

JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA

Order

11/10/2022

1. By way of the present petition filed under Section 482 of the

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as 'the

Code'), the petitioner has challenged the order dated 13.09.2022

passed by learned Sessions Judge, Jodhpur (hereinafter referred

to as 'the trial Court').

2. The facts in brief are that vide order dated 17.07.2019, a

fine of Rs.25,000/- was imposed upon the petitioner, as per the

provisions of Section 446 of the Code.

3. When the proceedings of the trial Court were quashed on the

basis of compromise by this Court in a judgment given in S.B.

Criminal Misc. Petition No.5070/2022, the petitioner moved an

application before the trial Court to waive or reduce fine of

Rs.25,000/-.

4. The petitioner's such application came to be rejected by the

trial Court vide its order dated 13.09.2022 inter alia observing

that the Court has no power to review its judgment.

(2 of 2) [CRLMP-6492/2022]

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner aruged that the trial Court

has erred in rejecting petitioner's application. He submitted that

when the proceeding itself has been quashed, the trial Court ought

to have waived the penalty or reduced the same.

6. On perusal of the order impugned, this Court finds that the

petitioner has not placed on record, the impugned order dated

17.07.2019 passed by the trial Court, whereby fine of Rs.25,000/-

was imposed.

7. That apart, against the order of imposition of penalty under

Section 446 of the Code, an appeal has been provided under

Section 449 of the Code. Such being the position, this Court does

not find any error in the impugned order dated 13.09.2022 passed

by the learned trial Court, which has held that it did not have the

power to review its own order.

8. The petition is dismissed. However, with a liberty to the

petitioner to prefer an appeal against the basic order dated

17.07.2019, in accordance with law.

9. The stay application also stands dismissed accordingly.

(DINESH MEHTA),J 127-akansha/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)