JAI PRAKASH DUBEY Vs. VIPIN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. is for recalling the order dated 23.3.2017 passed in Criminal Revision No.193/2011 whereby the criminal revision preferred by the respondents has been allowed without hearing the petitioner.

(2.) Precisely stated facts of the case are that an FIR has been registered at the instance of the petitioner against the respondents because on 21.1.2010 when petitioner was coming back to his house after casting his vote, he got surrounded by accused and they not only hurled verbal abuses, but also started hitting the petitioner with deadly weapons due to which petitioner suffered serious injuries. FIR vide crime No.14/2010 was registered and after investigation charge-sheet was filed. Trial Court framed the charges under Sections 452, 147, 307/149 and 323/149 of IPC. Against the order of framing of charge revision was preferred by some of the respondents and without giving opportunity of hearing ex-parte revision petition was allowed on 23.3.2017, therefore, present petition has been filed.

(3.) At this juncture, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the revision was heard and decided without giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner who was complainant in the case and in absence of complainant, revisional order could not have been passed, therefore, as per the mandate of the Apex Court in the case of Babloo Pasi vs. State of Jharkhand & Anr. reported in (2008) 13 SCC 133 and Raghu Raj Singh Rousha vs. M/s. Shivam Sundaram Promoters (P) L & Anr. reported in (2009) 2 SCC 363.