NDPS | Mentioning FIR Number On Memos Before Registration Makes the Entire Recovery Suspect: Himachal Pradesh High Court MACT | Once Deceased Is Proven To Be Skilled Worker, Deputy Commissioner's Wage Notification Is Applicable: P&H HC Bank’s Technical Excuses Can’t Override Employee’s Right to Ex Gratia Under Old Circulars: Bombay High Court Slams Canara Bank’s Rejection of Claim Once Worker Files Affidavit of Unemployment, Burden Shifts to Employer to Prove Gainful Employment: Delhi High Court Grants 17B Relief Despite 12-Year Delay Specific Relief Act | Readiness and Willingness Must Be Real and Continuous — Plaintiffs Cannot Withhold Funds and Blame the Seller: Bombay High Court Even If Claim Is Styled Under Section 163A, It Can Be Treated Under Section 166 If Negligence Is Pleaded And Higher Compensation Is Claimed: Supreme Court When Cheating Flows from One Criminal Conspiracy, the Law Does Not Demand 1852 FIRs: Supreme Court Upholds Single FIR in Multi-Crore Cheating Case Initiating Multiple FIRs on Same Facts is Impermissible: Supreme Court Quashes Parallel FIRs and Grants Bail Protection in Refund Case Limitation Act | Quasi-Judicial Bodies Cannot Invoke Section 5 Principles Without Express Statutory Grant: Supreme Court Arbitration Act | Commencement of Proceedings Triggered by Notice Receipt, Not Section 11 Filing: Supreme Court Strong and Cogent Evidence Must Exist at the Threshold to Deny Bail Under Section 319 CrPC: Supreme Court Appellate Court Under Section 37 Cannot Sit in Appeal Over Arbitral Award on Merits: Supreme Court Affidavit Ratifying Power of Attorney Cannot Be Disowned Later: Supreme Court Orders Specific Performance Despite Earlier Revocation Claims No Law Empowers a Corporation to Haunt a Retiree: Supreme Court Quashes Post-Retirement Disciplinary Action for Want of Jurisdiction Mere Expectation of Higher Bids Can't Justify Cancelling a Valid Auction: Supreme Court Quashes GDA’s Arbitrary Rejection of Highest Bidder Prolonged Incarceration Without Trial Violates Article 21, Even in Grave Economic Offences: Supreme Court Grants Bail to Arvind Dham in ₹673 Crore PMLA Case Article 14 | ‘Rules of the Game Cannot Be Changed Midstream’: Supreme Court Quashes Punjab’s Modified Sports Quota Policy for MBBS Admissions Rules of the Game Cannot Be Changed Midway: Supreme Court Quashes Bihar’s Retrospective Recruitment Amendment "Imaginary Ghost" - Court Permits Karthigai Deepam at Thiruparankundram ‘Deepathoon’: Madras High Court 353 IPC | Continuing Prosecution Against Citizens Despite Statutory Findings of Police Atrocities Is Abuse of Process: Kerala High Court Court Cannot Compel Plaintiff to Continue Suit Where No Liberty to File Fresh Suit is Sought: Bombay High Court Claim for Demurrage is Not a Crystallized Debt—Only an Unadjudicated Right to Sue: Andhra Pradesh High Court Declared Foreign Nationals Have No Right to Reside in India: Gauhati High Court Upholds Expulsion of Bangladeshi Woman Without Requiring Deportation Protocols

Accused’s Right to Be Heard in Revision Petition Upheld: P&H High Court Sets Aside Dismissal Order

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant legal development, the Punjab and Haryana High Court, in a recent judgment dated November 20, 2023, reaffirmed the right of the accused to be heard in a revision petition filed by the complainant. The court set aside an earlier dismissal order and directed a fresh examination of the case after hearing the accused.

The case, Harinder Singh vs. Rajinder Singh, revolved around the dismissal of a criminal complaint under Sections 420, 406, 465, 466, 467, 471, and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). The complaint had been initially dismissed for non-appearance of the complainant. Subsequently, the Sessions Judge, SAS Nagar, Mohali, had set aside the dismissal order and remanded the case for fresh consideration, all without hearing the petitioner-accused.

The crucial legal point addressed in the judgment was the interpretation of Section 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C). The court cited the precedent set in ‘Manharibhai Muljibhai Kakadia and another versus Shaileshbhai Mohanbhai Patel and others, 2012(4) RCR (Criminal) 689,’ to establish that the accused have a right to be heard in a revision petition filed by the complainant when challenging the dismissal of a complaint by the Magistrate.

The High Court, in its observation, stated, “In a revision petition preferred by the complainant before the High Court or the Sessions Judge challenging an order of the Magistrate dismissing the complaint under Section 203 of the Code at the stage under Section 200 or after following the process contemplated under Section 202 of the Code, the accused or a person who is suspected to have committed a crime is entitled to hearing by the revisional court.”

The judgment emphasized the importance of ensuring due process and the right to be heard for the accused, even in cases where a complaint has been dismissed. As a result, the impugned order was set aside, and the Sessions Judge was directed to reexamine the matter after affording the accused an opportunity to present their case.

Date of Decision: 20 November 2023

Harinder Singh VS Rajinder Singh

Latest Legal News