आधुनिक काल में घुमक्कड़ों के काम की बात कहने की आवश्यकता है, क्योंकि लोगों ने घुमक्कड़ों की कृतियों को चुरा के उन्हें गला फाड़-फाड़कर अपने नाम से प्रकाशित किया, जिससे दुनिया जानने लगी कि वस्तुत: तेली के कोल्हू के बैल ही दुनिया में सब कुछ करते हैं। आधुनिक विज्ञान में चार्ल्स डारविन का स्थान बहुत ऊँचा है। उसने प्राणियों की उत्पत्ति और मानव-वंश के विकास पर ही अद्वितीय खोज नहीं की, बल्कि कहना चाहिए कि सभी विज्ञानों को डारविन के प्रकाश में दिशा बदलनी पड़ी। लेकिन, क्या डारविन अपने महान आविष्कारों को कर सकता था, यदि उसने घुमक्कड़ी का व्रत न लिया होता?

The expression “case” is a word of comprehensive import; it includes a civil proceeding and is not restricted by anything contained in Section 115 of the Code to the entirety of the proceeding in a civil Court. To interpret the expression “case” as an entire proceeding only and not a part of the proceeding imposes an unwarranted restriction on the exercise of powers of superintendence and may result in certain cases in denying relief to the aggrieved litigant where it is most needed and may result in the perpetration of gross injustice.

It may also be observed that by ordering that a question may properly be put to a witness who was being examined, no case was decided by the Trial court. The expression “case” is not limited in its import to the entirety of the matter in dispute in an action. This Court observed in Major S. S. Khanna vs. Brig. F. J. Dillon (1964) 4 SCR 409 that the expression “case” is a word of comprehensive import:it includes a civil proceeding and is not restricted by anything contained in S. 115 of the Code to the entirety of the proceeding in a civil Court.

By a rule of harmonious construction, we think that the bar in sub-s. (2) of S. 397 is not meant to be attracted to such kinds of intermediate orders. They may not be final orders for the purposes of Art. 134 of the Constitution, yet it would not be correct to characterise them as merely interlocutory orders within the meaning of S. 397 (2). It is neither advisable, nor possible, to make a catalogue of orders to demonstrate which kinds of orders would be merely, purely or simply interlocutory and which kinds of orders would be final, and then to prepare an exhaustive list of those types of orders which will fall in between the two. The first two kinds are well known and can be culled out from many decided cases. We may, however, indicate that the type of order with which we are concerned in this case, even though it may not be final in one sense, is surely not interlocutory so as to attract the bar of sub-sec. (2) of S. 397. In our opinion it must be taken to be an order of the type falling in the middle course.

Section 482 of the present Code is the ad verbatim copy of Section 561 A of the old Code. This provision confers a separate and independent power on the High Court alone to pass orders ex debito justitiae in cases where grave and substantial injustice has been done or where the process of the Court has been seriously abused. It is not merely a revisional power meant to be exercised against the orders passed by subordinate Courts.

Sarabjit Singh and Another Versus State of Punjab and Another-Criminal Procedure Code, 1973—Section 319—Summoning of additional suspect to face trial—Power under Section 319 is an extra-ordinary power which is required to be exercised sparingly and if compelling reasons exist for taking cognizance against whom action has not been taken—Materials brought before Court must also be such which would satisfy Court that it is one of those cases where its jurisdiction should be exercised sparingly—An order under Section 319 should not be passed only because first informant or one of witnesses seeks to implicate other person(s)—Sufficient and cogent reasons are required to be assigned by Court so as to satisfy ingredients of the provisions—Mere ipse dixit or mere existence of a prima facie case may not serve the purpose—Impugned judgment set aside—Appeals allowed. Error! No text of specified style in document. vs. Error! No text of specified style in document.

Recent Updates