KAMAL SINGH Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Criminal Misc. petition under Section 482 Cr. P. C. arises from an order of this court dated 26th August, 1983 passed in S. B. Criminal Revision petition No. 240 of 1983 whereby the criminal revision petition was dismissed for want of prosecution. THE order dated 25. 8. 1983 reads as under; "s. B. Criminal Revision petition No. 240 of 1983 Kamal Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan, in the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan, Jaipur Bench, Jaipur. Date of Order: 26. 8. 1983 Present non. THE revision petition is dismissed for non-prosecution. Sd. K. S. Sidhu J. " May back if 1952 two eminent Judges of this Hon'ble Court Chief Justice Wanchoo and Justice Bafna in Keshav Lal's case reported in AIR 1952 Raj. 50 took pains to emphasise that so far as criminal jurisprudence is concerned, there is nothing like dismissal in default.

(2.) THEIR Lordships observed as under: "so far as the question of restoration, strictly so called, is concerned, there is no provision in the Code of Criminal Procedure which empowers a criminal court to restore a criminal case once it has been finally decided. The power of restoration has to be specifically conferred as in the case of Civil Procedure Code before it can be exercised by a court. It is however duty of the criminal court on the criminal side to decide a criminal matter on the merits whether a party or his pleader is present or not nor there can be no restoration in a criminal case the High Court has the power under section 551 (a) to make such orders as are necessary in the interest of justice. Thus when a criminal revision is dismissed for default without going into merit and there is no fault on the part of the applicants. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . grounds raised. " It would thus be seen that the concept of dismissal on default, dismissal for want of prosecution of a criminal revision petition or a criminal appeal filed before the High Court is almost unknown and foreign to well established principles of criminal jurisprudence. In that view of the matter it is obvious that this dismissal has been done by inadvertence by the Hon'ble Judge.