RAGHUVER SINGH AND ANR. Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners have challenged the order dated 6.10.2005 by the Special Judge (Fake Currency Cases), Jaipur City, Jaipur whereby while discharging the accused for offence under Sections 380, 379, 399, 402 Indian Penal Code. and 25, 54/59 Arms Act, learned Special Judge has passed certain strictures against the petitioners without giving an opportunity of hearing to them.

(2.) Mr. Rinesh Gupta, learned Counsel for the petitioners, has argued that the Petitioner No. 1 is the SHO of the Police Station and the Petitioner No. 2 is the investigating officer in the concerned case. He has further stated that after thorough Investigation, the challan has been submitted against the accused by the police. In fact, vide order dated 14.6.2005 charges were framed by the learned trial Court. However, while accepting the revision petition filed by the accused, learned revisional Court has passed strictures against the SHO and I.O. of the case. He has, therefore, argued that such strictures cannot be passed without giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners.

(3.) It is, indeed, a settled principle of law and part of the principle of natural justice that a man cannot be condemned unheard. Therefore, before passing any strictures against the present petitioners, learned Special Judge was legally bound to issue notice to them. For, such strictures can adversely affect the service career of the petitioners. Hence, before passing an order, which would adversely affect their civil right, a fair opportunity of hearing should be given to them. Since, no notice was issued to them by the learned Special Judge, the perversity is apparent on the face of the order itself. Thus, while allowing this petition we direct that the structures observed in the order dated 6.10.2005 should be deleted from the said order and such observations made by the learned Special Judge would not adversely affect the service career of the petitioners.