RAM PAL Vs. AJMER SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) RESPONDENTS ' learned counsel has raised preliminary objection that this second revision in the garb of petition under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code is not maintainable. She referred to the first para of the petition wherein it is clearly mentioned that this revision petition is directed against the proceedings initiated and the orders passed in the Courts below.

(2.) SHE contended that under Section 397(3) Cr.P.C. second revision is barred. Therefore, after dismissal of the revision by the learned lower Appellate Court, this petition purported to have been filed under Section 482 of the Code is not maintainable. To support her contention, she has relied upon Dharampal and others v. Smt. Ramshri and others, 1993(1) CLR 402.

(3.) RELYING on Kuldeep Kumar v. Chander Kanta, 1984 All India Criminal Law Reporter 599, Santosh Kumari and another v. Madan Lal Nagpal, 1991(1) All India Criminal Law Reporter 829 Raj Kapoor and others v. State, AIR 1980 SC 258 Nagamallappa v. Lalitha, 1985(3) All India Criminal Law Reporter 127. Petitioner's learned counsel contended that through second revision is barred under Section 397(3) of the Criminal Procedure Code, but still High Court is competent to exercise inherent powers to prevent abuse of the process of the Court.