Court No. - 50 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 12 of 2010 Petitioner :- Ranjeet Singh Respondent :- State Of U.P. & Others Petitioner Counsel :- Rama Nand Pandey,Pradeep Narain Pandey Respondent Counsel :- Govt. Advocate Hon'ble Mrs. Poonam Srivastava,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner at length and perused the
complaint and two impugned orders dated 24.1.2209 passed by
C.J.M. Basti in Crl. Case No. 2897 of 2008 and order dated
17.8.2009 passed by Addl. Sessions Judge, Court No.4 Basti in
Criminal Revision no. 76 of 2009.
Submissions of learned counsel is that both the courts below had
committed manifest error of law, hence they invoked jurisdiction
under article 226 of Constitution of India. Reliance is placed on a
decision of Apex Court in Raghraj Singh Vs Shivam
SundaramPrivate Limited and another (2009) 1 S.C.C. (Cri)
801. The thrust of the argument is that the party whose right stands
prejudiced is liable to be heard. The revisionist has not been heard
by the Courts below.
On perusal of the two orders transpires that both the court below
have carefully considered arguments advanced before coming to a
conclusion that evidence is not sufficient to summon the accused .
There is no merit in the writ petition. It is accordingly dismissed.
Order Date :- 6.1.2010
S.A.A.Rizvi