Final Order 3

Order Details: COPY OF ORDER
Pdf Text: IN THE COURT OF SH. DHARMENDER RANA
ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE/SPECIAL JUDGE
(NDPS) (CENTRAL):
TIS HAZARI COURTS: DELHI
Criminal Revision No. 232/2023
CNR No.:-DLCT01-005458-2023
In the matter of:-
1. Smt. Gauri Sharma
W/o Sh. Surender Kumar Sharma
R/o 2730/1, Roshanpura, Chowk Rai Ji
Nai Sarak, Chandni Chowk
Delhi-110006
2. Sh. Surender Kumar Sharma
S/o Sh. Bhagwat Kishor
R/o 2730/1, Roshanpura, Chowk Rai Ji,
Nai Sarak, Chandni Chowk
Delhi-110006
….......Revisionists
Versus
1. State
2. Sh. Seema Sharma
W/o Sh. Manoj Sharma
R/o 3202, Mohalla Dassan
Balli Maran, Delhi-110006
.......Respondents
Date of institution : 21.04.2023
Date of arguments: 21.04.2023
Date of order : 25.04.2023
Final order: Disposed off
ORDER
1. Aggrieved by the order dated 16.03.2023, whereby
application under Section 311 CrPC moved on behalf of
Criminal Revision No. 232/2021
Gauri Sharma and Anr Vs The State and Anr Page No. 1/3
-- 1 of 4 --
revisionists came to be dismissed, revisionists have now
preferred instant revision petition.
2. Briefly stated: The accused persons are facing trial for
offence punishable under Section 420 IPC r/w Section 120B IPC
on the allegations that they have cheated the complainant Seema
Sharma for inducing and deceiving money on the pretext of sale
of flat/shop which was ultimately not sold and the cheque for
refund of money was also got dishonoured for reason 'Account
Closed'. During the course of trial, an application under Section
311 CrPC was moved by accused persons to cross-examine
PW1/complainant, who could not be cross-examined earlier as
the previous counsel was admitted in hospital on 04.01.2023. The
said application under Section 311 CrPC came to be dismissed by
Ld. Trial Court vide detailed order dated 16.03.2023.
3. The instant revision petition is now preferred assailing the
impugned order dismissing the application under Section 311
CrPC.
4. At the very outset, Ld. APP for State has forcefully
contended that an order rejecting application under Section 311
CrPC is not amenable to revisional jurisdiction under Section 397
CrPC, as the same is purely an interlocutory order. It is thus
argued that revision petition deserves to be dismissed. He has
placed heavy reliance upon judgment of Hon'ble Delhi High
Court in the matter of Neelam Mahajan Vs The State, Cr. MC
No. 2242/2014 DOD 08.04.2016.
5. Since the issue of maintainability of instant revision
petition has been seriously disputed, I deem it appropriate to deal
with the same first.
Criminal Revision No. 232/2021
Gauri Sharma and Anr Vs The State and Anr Page No. 2/3
-- 2 of 4 --
6. Admittedly, Section 397(2) CrPC specifically bars revision
against purely interlocutory orders. It is no longer res integra
that orders passed by Ld. Trial Court refusing to call documents
and rejecting application under Section 311 CrPC is purely an
interlocutory order and as such revision against such orders is
clearly barred under Section 397(2) CrPC. Reliance is placed on
judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court titled as Setu Raman VS Raja
Manickam 2009(77)AIC 165(SC)
7. Consequently, I do not find any force in the submissions of
Ld. Counsel for revisionists that the instant revision petition is
maintainable.
8. Considering the totality of facts and circumstances, instant
revision petition is dismissed being not maintainable.
9. Revision petition is accordingly disposed off.
10. TCR be sent back to Ld. Trial Court alongwith copy of this
order.
11. Revision file be consigned to Record Room.
Announced in open court
today on 25.04.2023
(Dharmender Rana)
Addl Sessions Judge/Spl Judge, NDPS
(Central) Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi
Criminal Revision No. 232/2021
Gauri Sharma and Anr Vs The State and Anr Page No. 3/3
-- 3 of 4 --
Criminal Revision No. 232/2021
Gauri Sharma and Anr Vs The State and Anr Page No. 4/3
-- 4 of 4 --