MOHIT ALIAS SONU AND ANOTHER versus STATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

MOHIT ALIAS SONU AND ANOTHER versus STATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The Sessions Court's order refusing to summon the appellants under Section 319 Cr.P.C. is not an interlocutory order and is subject to revision under Section 397/401 Cr.P.C. The High Court erred in exercising jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. and in passing an order prejudicial to the appellants without giving them notice and opportunity of hearing as required by Section 401(2) Cr.P.C. The matter must be reconsidered by the High Court after giving such opportunity.

Parties
Appellant: Mohit alias Sonu; Appellant: Sarthak alias Babbal; Respondent: State of U.P.; Respondent: Deepak
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
01 July 2013
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against High Court Order Under Section 482 Cr.p.c. Setting Aside Sessions Court's Rejection of Application Under Section 319 Cr.p.c.
Outcome
Appeal allowed; impugned High Court order set aside; matter remanded to High Court for fresh decision after giving opportunity of hearing to appellants.
Legal Topics
Powers of High Court Under Section 482 Cr.p.c., Revision Under Section 397/401 Cr.p.c., Summoning Additional Accused Under Section 319 Cr.p.c., Opportunity of Hearing Under Section 401(2) Cr.p.c.
Criminal Procedure Powers of High Court Under Section 482 Cr.p.c. Revision Under Section 397/401 Cr.p.c. Summoning Additional Accused Under Section 319 Cr.p.c. Opportunity of Hearing Under Section 401(2) Cr.p.c.

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 20 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mohit alias Sonu

Appellant

Sarthak alias Babbal

Appellant

State of U.P.

Respondent

Deepak

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against High Court Order Under Section 482 Cr.p.c. Setting Aside Sessions Court's Rejection of Application Under Section 319 Cr.p.c.

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether an order rejecting the application under Section 319 Cr.P.C. is interlocutory and bars revision under Section 397(2) Cr.P.C.
  2. 2 Whether it is proper to invoke Section 482 Cr.P.C. for challenging the refusal to summon accused under Section 319 Cr.P.C.
  3. 3 Whether High Court must give notice and opportunity of hearing to persons prejudiced by such orders under Section 401(2) Cr.P.C. or Section 482 Cr.P.C.

Ratio Decidendi

The Sessions Court's order refusing to summon the appellants under Section 319 Cr.P.C. is not an interlocutory order and is subject to revision under Section 397/401 Cr.P.C. The High Court erred in exercising jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. and in passing an order prejudicial to the appellants without giving them notice and opportunity of hearing as required by Section 401(2) Cr.P.C. The matter must be reconsidered by the High Court after giving such opportunity.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; impugned High Court order set aside; matter remanded to High Court for fresh decision after giving opportunity of hearing to appellants.

Orders

  • High Court order dated 28.10.2009 set aside.
  • Matter remanded to High Court for consideration afresh after giving opportunity of hearing to the appellants.