VIMHANS v. State

Delhi High Court · 20 Feb 2019
Chandershekhar
CRL.REV.P.32/2012
criminal other Procedural

AI Summary

The High Court set aside non-speaking orders correcting a typographical error in charge framing and remanded the matter for a reasoned re-hearing by the Trial Court.

Full Text
Translation output
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
CRL.REV.P.32/2012&CRL.M.As.738/2012&10075/2013 ..... Petitioner
VIMHANS
Through: Mr.V.K.Malik,Adv.
VERSUS
STATE AND ANR.
Through:
Respondent Mr.Ashish Dutta,APP Mr.VineetChaudhary&Mr. Santosh Chaudhary,Advs.for
R-2
CRL.REV.P.99/2012&CRL.M.A.12119/2012
SMTULI
Petitioner
Through: Mr.ArunMahajan and Mr.K.R.Chawla,Advs.
STATE & ANR
VERSUS
Through: ....Respondents Mr.Ashish Dutta,APP Mr.VineetChaudhary&Mr. Santosh Chaudhary,Advs.for
R-2 CORAlVIt
HON'BLEMR.JUSTICE CHANDERSHEKHAR
0/„ 20.02.2019
ORDER

1. Learned counsel for the parties, after some arguments, submitted thatthe impugned order dated 7.12.2011 is a non-speaking order wherein it is stated that due to typographical mistake m the 2019:DHC:7752 ro order dated 24.10.2011, inadvertent omission of the letter A was made, and instead of Section 304A Indian Penal Code, 1860(IPC), Section 304 IPC was mentioned. Learned counsel for the parties submitted thatthe impugned order is a non-speaking order,the matter may be remanded back to the Trial Court after setting aside both the orders dated 24.10.2011 and 7.12.2011.

2. I have also perused the impugned order dated 7.12.2011 and find it to be a non-speaking order and in view ofthe submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, I deem it appropriate to set aside the impugned order dated 7.12.2011 and the order dated 24.10.2011 and remand the matter back to the Trial Court for re-hearing on the point ofcharge and passing ofan order as perlaw.Parties are directed to appear before the Trial Courton 26.2.2019.

3. The petition is disposed of in the above terms. Interim order stands vacated.Pending applications also stand disposed of.

4. It is clarified that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits ofthe petition or contentions ofboth the parties. o CHANb™ SHEKHAR,J