SALIM Vs. GEORGE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner in Crl.M.C. No.5281 of 2016 is the 2nd respondent in Crl.M.P. No.530/2016 of the Court of Enquiry Commissioner and Special Judge(Vigilance), Muvattupuzha, against whom Annexure VIII order has been passed by the court below. R.P. No.893/2016 is filed by the 3rd respondent in O.P.(Crl) No.390/2016. Crl.M.A. No.9367/2016 is filed by the 2nd respondent in Crl.M.C. No.4439/2016. O.P.(Crl) No.390/2016 was filed by the 4th respondent, and Crl.M.C. No.4439/2016 was filed by the 7th respondent, in Crl.M.P. No.530/2016 of the court below.

(2.) This Court had vide judgment dated 13.07.2016 quashed the FIR in VC. 12/2016 of the VACB, Ernakulam and all further proceedings in it, as against the 4th respondent in Crl.M.P. No.530/2016. Similarly, this Court had vide order dated 18.072016 quashed the order passed by the court below in Crl.M.P. No.530/2016 as against the 7th respondent.

(3.) The petitioner in R.P. 893/2016 as well as in Crl.M.A. No.9367/2016, is the complainant in Crl.M.P. No.530/2016. According to the petitioner, he was not heard and was not given an opportunity of being heard prior to the aforesaid judgment and order passed by this Court in favour of the 4th respondent and the 7th respondent, and on that ground the petitioner wants to get the said judgment and order recalled. The petitioner in Crl.M.C. No.5281/2016 is the 2nd respondent, who wants to get Annexure VIII order passed by the court below as against him, quashed.