DEBA PRASAD DUTTA Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This intra-Court writ appeal arises from an order dtd. 8/6/2023 passed by the learned Single Bench of this Court in the criminal writ jurisdiction being WP(Crl.) No.5/2023. The said writ petition filed by the petitioner (appellant herein) appearing in person seeking quashing of the FIR as well as the charges framed against him by the trial Court was dismissed by the learned Single Judge vide order dtd. 8/6/2023. On the previous date of hearing, we had instructed the Registry to make a report regarding maintainability of the writ appeal.

(2.) Office note dtd. 3/10/2023 indicates that Rule 2(2) of Chapter V-A of the Gauhati High Court Rules are silent as to whether an intra-Court appeal would lie against an order passed in a criminal matter by Hon'ble Single Judge of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

(3.) The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Ram Kishan Fauji -Vs- State of Haryana and Ors., reported in (2017) 5 SCC 533 has laid down that Letters Patent Appeal (LPA) does not lie against an order passed by learned Single Judge of the High Court in exercise of the criminal jurisdiction. In the said case, the writ petition before the learned Single Judge of the High Court was filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and the Division Bench entertained a Letters Patent Appeal against the order of the learned Single Judge. The judgment of the Division Bench of Punjab and Haryana High Court was reversed by a three Judges Bench of the Hon'ble Supreme Court laying down that a letters patent appeal which is akin to an intra-Court writ appeal would not lie to the Division Bench against an order passed by the Single Bench of the High Court in exercise of criminal jurisdiction.