SHARDA Vs. SURAT SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By medium of this application filed under Sec. 482 Crimial P.C. (for short the 'Code'), the applicant/ respondent has sought recalling of the order dated 20.8.2016, whereby the Cr.MMO No. 198 of 2016 came to be allowed in absence of the respondent.

(2.) It is averred that though the case was fixed on 11.8.2016 but on account of old age, the applicant/respondent forgot the date and could not therefore appear. It is only later in Sept. that he realised that he had received summons from this Court and contacted his counsel at Shimla and immediately thereafter filed the instant application. The learned counsel for the applicant/respondent would contend that order passed by this Court has resulted in injustice to him as the sublime principle of natural justice viz. right to be heard has been violated and for that reason this Court may recall the order passed by it.

(3.) On the other hand, the non-applicant/petitioner has vehemently opposed this application and has raised objections regarding its maintainability on the ground that there is no power of review available with the criminal court after the judgment has been rendered and in support of his contention has relied upon the provisions of Sec. 362 of the Code. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the records of the case.