Full Text
Translation output
v $-48 & 55 .
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
CRL.REV.P. 192/2013
B K SAHNI
Petitioner
Through: Petitioner in person
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
CRL.REV.P. 192/2013
B K SAHNI
Petitioner
Through: Petitioner in person
VERSUS
RAJINDER KUMAR
Respondent
Through And
Respondent
Through And
CRL.REV.P. 200/2013
B K SAHNI..... Petitioner
Through: Petitioner in person
B K SAHNI..... Petitioner
Through: Petitioner in person
VERSUS
PRAVEEN KUMAR
Respondent
Through
Respondent
Through
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KAILASH GAMBHIR
22.03.2013 These two petitions have been filed by the petitioner to challenge the
2013:DHC:8479 A
•r- order dated 2.3.2013 passed by the Ld.MM thereby granting one last and final opportunity to the petitioner to address arguments on his application as well as final arguments.
I have heard counsel for the petitioner.
Vide order dated 2.3.2013 the Ld.MM granted last and final opportunity to the petitioner for addressing arguments on the said application moved by the petitioner under Section 311 Cr.P.C. as well as final arguments. Ld.Trial Court has also imposed cost of Rs. 1000/- in each case, out of which the petitioner is to pay a sum of Rs.500/- to the opposite party and deposit Rs.500/- with DLSA.
Without interfering with the said order imposing cost on the petitioner, this court is of the view that the Ld.MM should first decide the application moved by the petitioner under Section 311 Cr.P.C. and thereafter, depending on the fate of the said application, decide the matter.
The direction given bythe Ld.MM as regards the fixing of the matter for the final arguments without taking a view on the said application moved by the petitioner at the first instance, cannot be appreciated. The court find infirmity in the order of the Ld.MM to this extent.
For the foregoing reasons the impugned order dated 2.3.2013 is set aside to a limited extent of the direction given by the Ld.Magistrate to fix the matter for final arguments. Let the Ld. Magistrate first hear arguments of the parties on the said application and then proceed in the matter further.
The matter is fixed for 10.4.2013 as per the petitioner. On the said date, the
Ld.Trial Court shall hear arguments on the said application moved by the petitioner in both cases.
Dasti MARCH 22,2013 g A KAILASH GAMBHIR, J
22.03.2013 These two petitions have been filed by the petitioner to challenge the
2013:DHC:8479 A
•r- order dated 2.3.2013 passed by the Ld.MM thereby granting one last and final opportunity to the petitioner to address arguments on his application as well as final arguments.
I have heard counsel for the petitioner.
Vide order dated 2.3.2013 the Ld.MM granted last and final opportunity to the petitioner for addressing arguments on the said application moved by the petitioner under Section 311 Cr.P.C. as well as final arguments. Ld.Trial Court has also imposed cost of Rs. 1000/- in each case, out of which the petitioner is to pay a sum of Rs.500/- to the opposite party and deposit Rs.500/- with DLSA.
Without interfering with the said order imposing cost on the petitioner, this court is of the view that the Ld.MM should first decide the application moved by the petitioner under Section 311 Cr.P.C. and thereafter, depending on the fate of the said application, decide the matter.
The direction given bythe Ld.MM as regards the fixing of the matter for the final arguments without taking a view on the said application moved by the petitioner at the first instance, cannot be appreciated. The court find infirmity in the order of the Ld.MM to this extent.
For the foregoing reasons the impugned order dated 2.3.2013 is set aside to a limited extent of the direction given by the Ld.Magistrate to fix the matter for final arguments. Let the Ld. Magistrate first hear arguments of the parties on the said application and then proceed in the matter further.
The matter is fixed for 10.4.2013 as per the petitioner. On the said date, the
Ld.Trial Court shall hear arguments on the said application moved by the petitioner in both cases.
Dasti MARCH 22,2013 g A KAILASH GAMBHIR, J
JUDGMENT