RAVI CHAUDHARY Vs. STATE OF UTTARANCHAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS criminal revision, preferred by the revisionist under Sections 397/401 of The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter to be referred as Code of Criminal Procedure), is directed against the judgment and order dated 03.06.2006 passed by Sessions Judge, Hardwar in Criminal Revision No. 281 of 2005, Pradeep Paliwal and Ors. v. State of Uttaranchal whereby the revision preferred by Respondent Nos. 2 to 5 has been allowed and judgment and order dated 1.9.2005 passed by Judicial Magistrate, Hardwar has been set aside.

(2.) HEARD Sri S.K. Aggarwal, Sr. Adv. assisted by Sri Tapan Singh, Adv. for the revisionist, Sri M.A. Khan, learned Brief Holder for the State/Respondent No. 1, Sri U.K. Uniyal, Sr. Adv. assisted by Sri Sandeep Kothari, Adv. for Respondent Nos. 2 to 5 and perused the entire material available on record.

(3.) SRI S.K. Aggarwal, Sr. Advocate has solely argued that the Respondents were summoned by the Judicial Magistrate, Hardwar vide his judgment and order dated 1.9.2005 on the basis of protest petition filed by the revisionist. But in the revision filed before Sessions Judge, the revisionist/complainant -Ravi Chaudhary was riot made party and even he had got no information about the filing of the said revision. Hence, the order passed by Sessions Judge is against law and principles of natural justice. In support of this argument, he has cited a judgment rendered by Hon'ble SC in the case of Mosiruddin Munshi v. Mohd. Siraj and Ors. reported in : (2008) 8 SCC 434 and relied on para 4 which is reproduced as under: