Advocatetanmoy Law Library

Legal Database and Encyclopedia

Home » Inherent powers of High Court are to be invoked after revision rejected by Session Judge

Inherent powers of High Court are to be invoked after revision rejected by Session Judge

UTTARAKHAND HIGH COURT

SINGLE BENCH

( Before : Sudhanshu Dhulia, J. )

PURAN CHANDRA MELKANI — Appellant

Vs.

GOPAL SINGH — Respondent

Criminal Misc. Application No. 808 of 2015

Decided on : 08-07-2015

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) – Section 200, Section 202, Section 482
Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) – Section 420, Section 463, Section 464, Section 468, Section 469, Section 471, Section 499, Section 504, Section 506

JUDGMENTJudgment The statement given by the Judge on the grounds of a decree or order - CPC 2(9). It contains a concise statement of the case, points for determination, the decision thereon, and the reasons for such decision - Order 20 Rule 4(2).  Section 354 of CrPC requires that every judgment shall contain points for determination, the decision thereon and the reasons for the decision. Indian Supreme Court Decisions > Law declared by Supreme Court to be binding on all courts (Art 141 Indian Constitution) Civil and judicial authorities to act in aid of the Supreme Court (Art 144) Supreme Court Network On Judiciary – Portal > Denning: “Judges do not speak, as do actors, to please. They do not speak, as do advocates, to persuade. They do not speak, as do historians, to recount the past. They speak to give Judgment. And in their judgments, you will find passages, which are worthy to rank with the greatest literature….” Law Points on Judgment Writing > The judge must write to provide an easy-to-understand analysis of the issues of law and fact which arise for decision. Judgments are primarily meant for those whose cases are decided by judges (State Bank of India and Another Vs Ajay Kumar Sood SC 2022)

Sudhanshu Dhulia, J.—The inherent powers of this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. are sought to be invoked in the present application. Brief facts of the case are that the present applicant moved a complaint on 15.04.2014 before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Almora under Section 463/464/468/469/471/420/499/504 and 506 of I.P.C., which was registered as Criminal Case No. 190 of 2014. It has been alleged in the complaint that the present applicant is a registered contractor in the Medical Department and the respondent is presently posted as Accountant on contractContract An agreement enforceable by law is a contract. All agreements are contracts if they are made by the free consent of parties competent to contract, for a lawful consideration and with a lawful object, and are not hereby expressly declared to be void. Indian Contract Act. basis in the office of Chief Medical Officer, Almora. He (respondent) had impersonated himself and sought information under the Right to Information Act relating to the petitioner. When the present applicant asked him about the forged signature of another person in order to seek information, the respondent threatened the petitioner. Therefore, the present applicant filed a complaint before the court concerned. The learned Magistrate in accordance with Sections 200 and 202 of Cr.P.C. after due enquiry rejected the application of the petitioner vide order dated 08.10.2014. Thereafter, the petitioner preferred a criminal revision before the learned Session Judge, Almora, which was also dismissed vide order dated 02.03.2015. Hence the present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. before this Court.

2. From the perusal of the impugned order of the revisional court it appears that the revisional court again looked into the entire aspect of the case and come to the conclusion that prima facie no case is made out in the complaint of the petitioner. The revisionist has no authority to send notice to a person who seeks information under Right to Information Act. The details of the incident alleged to have in the office of respondent, which has not been elaborated in the complaint as well as in the statement of the complainant. In short, after giving full consideration to the entire aspect of the matter, the revisional court too has come to the conclusion that no offence is made out of forgery and affirmed the order of the court below. This Court finds no reason to take a different view in the matter other than what has been taken by the courts below. The application (under Section 482 Cr.P.C.) is devoid of any merit and the same is hereby dismissed in-limine.


(2015) 2 NCC 821