NAVKAR GOSHALA PANZRAPOL Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) RULE. RULE made returnable forthwith. By consent of the learned counsel for the parties heard finally at the stage of admission.

(2.) THE present application, is directed against the judgment and order dated 02.02.2008 passed by Adhoc Additional Sessions Judge-2 Dhule in Criminal Revision Application No.42/2007. By the impugned order, the Revisional Court has handed over the interim custody of 25 animals to present respondent No.2, who has not participated in the present application though duly served.

(3.) PERUSAL of the record shows that when the order came to be passed by the learned Magistrate, the said animals were in the custody of the applicant. Perusal of the record shows that the applicant is not made party in the criminal revision application. Thus, it is clear that the impugned order is passed by the revisional court without affording any opportunity to the applicant. In the premise, the impugned order requires to be quashed and set aside. Accordingly, the order impugned is hereby quashed and set aside. The matter is remitted back to the Sessions Judge, Dhule with direction to hear the revision afresh by adding the applicant as party respondent and giving him opportunity of hearing. Considering the age of this application, learned Revisional Court is directed to dispose of the revision within the period of 3 months from the date of receipt of writ of this order. Accordingly, the application is allowed. Rule is made absolute as indicated above.