BAIJNATH DUBEY & ANR. Vs. NCT OF DELHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Petitioners invoke inherent powers of the Court for rehearing on charge which was ordered to be framed against the Petitioners by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate ("M.M.") by an order dated 22.06.2007. The Petitioners plea is that on an Application under Section 91 Cr.P.C. moved by the two co -accused (who were arrested later on), the DCP (Licensing) has informed that "Hindustan People" is a newspaper registered with the Registrar of Newspapers and "North East Times" has been de -blocked by the Registrar of Newspapers. It is urged that in view of this, the offences under Sections 419, 468, 471 IPC could not have been ordered to be framed against the Petitioners.

(2.) A Revision Petition under Section 397/ 399 of the Code of Criminal Procedure was preferred by the Petitioners for issuing directions to the learned M.M. for rehearing the case on the matter of framing charges. The Petition, however, was dismissed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge ("A.S.J.") on the ground that even if the report of the DCP (Licensing) was provided to the Petitioners on 06.08.2012, the same did not entitle them to rehearing of the framing of charge. The learned A.S.J. held that there was no ground for condonation of delay. The Revision Petition was accordingly dismissed.

(3.) IT is well settled that the powers of the High Court under Section 482 of the Code are to be exercised sparingly with circumspection and not as a matter of routine. Inherent powers of the High Court under Section 482 are meant to add ex debito justitiae to do real and substantial justice or to prevent abuse of the process of the Court.