Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Shri Jitendra Deshprabhu, filed a Criminal Writ Petition before the High Court of Bombay at Goa challenging an order dated 27.06.2013 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Panaji, which dismissed his revision petition as not maintainable. The revision was preferred against an order issuing process under Section 204 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The petitioner was represented by Mr. D. Pangam, while respondent nos. 1 to 3 were represented by Mr. R. Menezes, and respondent nos. 4 to 10 by Public Prosecutor Mr. S. R. Rivankar. The core legal issue was whether a revision against an order issuing process under Section 204 CrPC is maintainable before the Sessions Court. During the hearing, the petitioner's counsel brought to the court's notice a recent Division Bench judgment of the same High Court dated 21.10.2015 in Criminal Writ Petition No. 159 of 2014 (Avinash Trimbakrao Dhondage v. The State of Maharashtra), which had held that such a revision is maintainable. The respondents' counsel did not dispute this position. The High Court, agreeing with the Division Bench view, held that the Sessions Judge erred in dismissing the revision as not maintainable. Consequently, the impugned order was quashed and set aside, and the matter was remitted back to the Sessions Court for fresh disposal of the revision petition on its own merits, in accordance with law. The court directed that the parties appear before the Sessions Court on 11.01.2016.
Headnote
A) Criminal Procedure - Maintainability of Revision - Order Issuing Process - Section 204, 397, 401, 482 Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - The court considered whether a revision petition against an order issuing process under Section 204 CrPC is maintainable before the Sessions Court. The petitioner challenged the Sessions Judge's order dismissing his revision as not maintainable. The High Court, relying on a Division Bench judgment in Avinash Trimbakrao Dhondage v. The State of Maharashtra, held that such a revision is maintainable. The impugned order was set aside and the matter remitted to the Sessions Court for fresh disposal on merits. (Paras 2-5)
Issue of Consideration
Whether a revision petition against an order issuing process under Section 204 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 is maintainable before the Sessions Court.
Final Decision
The impugned order dated 27.06.2013 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Panaji is quashed and set aside. The matter is remitted back to the Sessions Court for fresh disposal of the revision petition on its own merits in accordance with law. The parties are directed to appear before the Sessions Court on 11.01.2016.
Law Points
- Maintainability of revision against order issuing process under Section 204 CrPC
- Section 397 CrPC
- Section 401 CrPC
- Section 482 CrPC
Case Details
2015 LawText (BOM) (12) 136
Criminal Writ Petition No. 128 of 2013
F. M. Reis, C. V. Bhadang
Mr. D. Pangam, Mr. R. Menezes, Mr. S. R. Rivankar
Shri Pradip Kakodkar, Shri Kashinath Jairam Shetye, Dr. Ketan S. Govekar, The Police Inspector (ACB), The Police Inspector (Crime Branch), The Police Inspector (Panaji Police Station), The Police Inspector (Pernem Police Station), The Superintendent of Police (ACB), The Superintendent of Police (Crime Branch), The Superintendent of Police (North)
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Criminal writ petition challenging the order of the Sessions Judge dismissing the revision petition as not maintainable.
Remedy Sought
The petitioner sought to set aside the Sessions Judge's order dated 27.06.2013 and to have the revision petition heard on merits.
Filing Reason
The Sessions Judge dismissed the revision petition against the order issuing process under Section 204 CrPC on the ground that it was not maintainable.
Previous Decisions
The learned Sessions Judge, Panaji, by order dated 27.06.2013, dismissed the revision petition preferred by the petitioner as not maintainable.
Issues
Whether a revision petition against an order issuing process under Section 204 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 is maintainable before the Sessions Court.
Submissions/Arguments
The petitioner's counsel argued that a Division Bench of this Court in Avinash Trimbakrao Dhondage v. The State of Maharashtra (Criminal Writ Petition No. 159 of 2014) has held that such a revision is maintainable.
The respondents' counsel did not dispute the position of law as laid down in the Division Bench judgment.
Ratio Decidendi
A revision petition against an order issuing process under Section 204 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 is maintainable before the Sessions Court, as held by a Division Bench of this Court in Avinash Trimbakrao Dhondage v. The State of Maharashtra.
Judgment Excerpts
A short point which comes for consideration in the above writ petition without going into the merits of the rival contentions is whether the impugned judgment passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Panaji, dated 27.06.2013 dismissing the revision preferred by the petitioner on the ground that such revision petition was not maintainable is sustainable in law.
Mr. Pangam, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner during the course of the hearing of the above writ petition has brought to our notice a judgment of the Division Bench of this Court dated 21.10.2015 passed in Criminal Writ Petition No. 159 of 2014 in the case of Avinash Trimbakrao Dhondage V/s The State of Maharashtra wherein it has been held that a revision against an order issuing process under Section 204 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is maintainable.
Procedural History
The petitioner filed a revision petition before the Sessions Court, Panaji, challenging an order issuing process under Section 204 CrPC. The Sessions Judge dismissed the revision as not maintainable on 27.06.2013. The petitioner then filed the present Criminal Writ Petition No. 128 of 2013 before the High Court of Bombay at Goa. During the pendency of this petition, a Division Bench of the same High Court in Criminal Writ Petition No. 159 of 2014 (Avinash Trimbakrao Dhondage v. State of Maharashtra) held that such a revision is maintainable. The High Court, by judgment dated 01.12.2015, allowed the writ petition, set aside the Sessions Judge's order, and remitted the matter for fresh disposal.
Acts & Sections
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973: 204, 397, 401, 482
