S. DIWAKAR Vs. T. ARUNACHALAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The unnumbered Criminal Appeal in Cri. A. Sr. No. 51810 of 2014 has been preferred by the appellant against the order passed in unnumbered Cri. R. C. Sr. No. 15119 of 2014 on the file of this Court. The unnumbered Criminal Appeal came up before this Bench to decide the maintainability, since the same is preferred against an order passed by a learned single Judge of this Court in an unnumbered Criminal Revision.

(2.) The petitioner, who is party-in-person appeared before this Bench and argued that though the unnumbered appeal is preferred by him under Article 117 of Limitation Act and Section 372 of the Code of Criminal Procedure against the order, dated 7-10-2014 passed by learned single Judge of this Court, in the unnumbered criminal revision in M.P. No.1 of 2014 in Cri. R. C. Sr. No. 15119 of 2014, according to him, the same is maintainable.

(3.) It is an admitted fact that the appellant herein was the counsel for the respondent in the case in C.C. No.4492 of 2013 on the file of the XIV Metropolitan Magistrate Court, Egmore, Chennai, wherein summons were issued to the accused persons and on 17-12-2013, P.W.1/complainant was examined and Exs. P.1 to P.21 were marked and for cross- examination of P.W. 1, the case was adjourned to 3-1-2014. A copy of the order, dated 7-10-2014, reveals that the aforesaid case was adjourned to 3-1-2014 by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate. It is seen that the adjudication dated 17-12-2013 was challenged by the respondent herein through his counsel, the appellant herein, as he was his advocate by filing Cri. R. C. No. 1 of 2014 on the file of the learned II Additional City Civil-cum-Sessions Judge, Chennai. During the pendency of the revision, the appellant herein, who was the counsel for the respondent advised the respondent herein to file Tr. O.P. to transfer the revision to some other Court.