Delay in Test Identification & Absence of Motive Fatal to Prosecution: Allahabad High Court Acquits Man for Murder Tokre Koli or Dhor Koli – Both Stand on Same Legal Footing: Bombay High Court Slams Scrutiny Committee for Disregarding Pre-Constitutional Records Consent Is No Defence When Victim Is Under 16: Delhi High Court Upholds Rape Conviction Granting Pre-Arrest Bail in Minor Rape Cases Would Send a Harmful Societal Signal: Delhi High Court Refuses Anticipatory Bail to Accused Citing POCSO’s Rigorous Standards Void Marriage No Shield Against Cruelty Charges: Karnataka High Court Affirms Section 498A Applies Even In Deceptive and Void Marital Relationships Consolidation Authorities Cannot Confer Ownership Or Alter Scheme Post Confirmation Without Due Process: Punjab & Haryana High Court Reaffirms Civil Court’s Jurisdiction Over Void Post-Scheme Orders Litigation Policy is Not Law, Can’t Enforce Guidelines Through Courts: Rajasthan High Court Refuses to Entertain Quo Warranto Against Additional Advocate General’s Appointment Police and Lawyers Are Two Limbs of Justice System: Rajasthan High Court Takes Suo Motu Cognizance in Police Misconduct Incident Sole Testimony, Forensic Gaps, and Withheld Witness: No Conviction Possible: Delhi High Court Affirms Acquittal in Murder Trial Remand Keeps the Dispute Alive – Not Arrears: Bombay High Court Holds SVLDRS Relief Must Be Computed Under Litigation Category Use of ‘Absconding’ in Employment Context Not Defamatory Per Se, But A Privileged Communication Under Exception 7 of Section 499 IPC: Allahabad High Court Daughter’s Right Extinguished When Partition Effected Prior to 2005 Amendment: Madras High Court Trial Courts Cannot Direct Filing of Challan After Conviction — Punjab & Haryana High Court Quashes Directions Against DSP Veer Singh Rule 4 Creates Parity, Not a Parallel Pension Pipeline: Rajasthan High Court Denies Dual Pension to Ex-Chief Justice Serving as SHRC Chairperson Right to Be Heard Must Be Preserved Where Claim Has a Legal Basis: Orissa High Court Upholds Impleadment of Will Beneficiary in Partition Suit Long-Term Ad Hocism Is Exploitation, Not Employment: Orissa High Court Orders Regularization Of Junior Typist After 25 Years Of Service PIL Cannot Be a Tool for Personal Grievances: Supreme Court Upholds Municipal Body’s Power to Revise Property Tax After 16 Years Omission of Accused’s Name by Eyewitness in FIR is a Fatal Lacuna: Supreme Court Acquits Man Convicted of Murder Correction In Revenue Map Under Section 30 Isn’t A Tool To Shift Plot Location After 17 Years: Supreme Court Quashes High Court’s Remand Casteist Abuses Must Be In Public View: Supreme Court Quashes SC/ST Act Proceedings Where Alleged Insults Occurred Inside Complainant’s House Resignation Bars Pension, But Not Gratuity: Supreme Court Draws Sharp Line Between Voluntary Retirement and Resignation in DTC Employee Case

Supreme Court Sets Aside High Court Order for Violation of Accused's Right to Hearing

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a recent judgment, the Supreme Court of India set aside an order passed by the High Court of Judicature at Madras in a criminal revision case. The case, numbered SLP (Crl.) No.4230 of 2023, involved an appeal against the High Court's decision to allow the revision filed by the complainant against the dismissal of their application under Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

The appellants argued that the High Court had violated the provisions of sub-section (2) of Section 401 of the Code by not providing an opportunity of hearing to the proposed accused. The appellants relied on the interpretation of this provision as explained in the case of Manharbhai Muljibhai Kapadia v. Shaileshbhai Mohanbhai Patel & Others (2012) 10 SCC 517.

The Supreme Court accepted the appellants' argument and acknowledged that the proposed accused were not served notice of the revision proceedings, thereby violating their right to a hearing. The Court cited the Manharbhai Muljibhai Kapadia case and another case, Bal Manohar Jalan v. Sunil Paswan (2014) 9 SCC 640, to support its decision.

Consequently, the Supreme Court set aside the High Court's order and remitted the matter back to the High Court for fresh consideration of the revision in accordance with the law.

This judgment highlights the importance of ensuring that the rights of the accused are respected, including their right to be heard during revision proceedings. Violating this right can have serious consequences and may lead to orders being set aside on appeal.

Decided on: 12.05.2023

Santhakumari & Ors. VS State of Tamil Nadu & Anr.

Latest Legal News