PAWAN KUMAR Vs. STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent No. 2. No one appears on behalf of the respondent No. 3 although he has been served. Learned counsel for the petitioner has raised preliminary objection that the revisional court has decided the revision petition without giving notice to the complainant Pawan Kurnir S/o Nandlal and also without giving notice to his sister Sarla. An application under Sec. 97 Cr.PC. was moved by Pawan Kumar S/o Nandlal against Pawan Kumar S/o Bajrang Lal and also against Bajranglal and on this application Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Churu has issued search warrant against Sarla Devi and he passed the order dated 5.6.2002. Against this order, a revision was filed by Pawan Kumar S/o Bajrang Lal and only State was arrayed as party in the matter and no notice was given to the complainant Pawan Kumar S/o Nandlal and Sarla Devi. Hence,. this preliminary objection has been raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner and on the basis of that he prayed that this matter be remanded back and Pawan Kumar S/o Nandlal and Sarla Devi may be given opportunity of being heard.

(2.) Having heard learned counsel for both the parties and gone through the order passed by the lower court, without commenting on the merits of case, I find force in the preliminary objection raised by the petitioner Against the order dated 5.6.2002, revision was filed before the Sessions Judge. Churu, only State Government was made party and no notice was given to the complainant and his sister Saha. Hence, this revision was decided without hearing to the complainant and his sister who has been searched and produced in the Lower Court. They both were necessary party in the revision and the revisional court should have given them opportunity of putting their case. Therefore, on this count alone the order dated 28.8.2002 passed by the Sessions Judge, Churu is bad in law.

(3.) Accordingly, this revision petition is allowed and the order dated 28.8.2002 passed by the Sessions Judge, Churu is set aside and the matter is remanded back to him for fresh Decision in accordance with the law after giving notice and opportunity of being heard to Pawan Kumar S/o Nandlal and also notice to Mst. Serie D/o Nandlal. Record of the lower court may be sent back immediately along with the copy of this order to the Sessions Judge, Churu. Revision Allowed as above.