Case Note & Summary
The applicant, Dr. Rajendra Narayanrao Dhakne, was the original accused in R.C.C. No. 898/2011 filed by the State of Maharashtra through Dr. Gauri Raghunath Rathod, Civil Surgeon, District Hospital, Beed, alleging offences under Sections 5(2), 23 and 25 of the Prohibition of Sex Selection Act. The Chief Judicial Magistrate, Beed, issued process against the applicant on 21-12-2011 without recording verification statement. Aggrieved, the applicant filed Criminal Revision Application No. 21/2012 before the Sessions Judge, Beed, which was admitted on 7-3-2012. Subsequently, when the main case was fixed for recording of evidence, the applicant filed a Pursish (Exhibit 8/C) on 17-7-2012 seeking to withdraw the revision application as he did not desire to prosecute it. The learned Sessions Judge, Beed, passed an order on the Pursish stating 'Seen and filed' and then passed a separate order below Exhibit 1 on the same day holding that 'It is well settled that Criminal Revision has to be decided by Sessions Court on merits. Hence, matter be posted for final hearing.' The applicant then approached the High Court under Section 482 CrPC seeking quashing of that order and permission to withdraw the revision application. The High Court, after hearing both sides, held that the applicant has a right to withdraw the revision application and the Sessions Court cannot compel a merits hearing. The impugned order dated 17-7-2012 was quashed and set aside, and the applicant was permitted to withdraw Criminal Revision Application No. 21/2012. The application was allowed and rule was made absolute.
Headnote
A) Criminal Procedure - Withdrawal of Revision Application - Section 482 CrPC - The applicant (original accused) sought to withdraw his criminal revision application pending before the Sessions Court. The Sessions Court refused and directed hearing on merits. The High Court held that the applicant has a right to withdraw the revision application and the Sessions Court cannot compel a merits hearing. The impugned order was quashed and the revision application was permitted to be withdrawn. (Paras 1-7)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Sessions Court can refuse to permit withdrawal of a criminal revision application and insist on deciding it on merits.
Final Decision
The application is allowed. The impugned order dated 17-7-2012 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Beed, in Criminal Revision Application No. 21/2012 is quashed and set aside. The applicant is permitted to withdraw Criminal Revision Application No. 21/2012. Rule is made absolute.
Law Points
- Criminal revision application can be withdrawn by applicant
- Sessions Court cannot insist on merits hearing
- Section 482 CrPC inherent powers
- withdrawal of revision application
