Final Order 25

Order Details: COPY OF ORDER
Pdf Text: Criminal Revision no. 473/2023
Casa Italia Social Welfare Association vs State & Ors.
17.11.2025
Present: Sh. Gaurav Singh, Ld. Counsel for petitioner.
Ms. Malvika Choudhary and Sh.Chaitanya Girdhar,
Ld. Counsels for respondents.
Present revision petition has been directed against the
impugned order dated 01.04.2023 whereby the application for
cancellation of bail against the accused persons namely Anuj Gaur,
Rahul Bhardwaj, Sandeep Pahwa and Deepak Gupta was dismissed
by Ld. JMFC.
Accused persons were not arrested during the
investigation, however, on appearance before the court they were
granted regular bail.
Vide the application for cancellation of bail, it has
been submitted that accused persons have misused the liberty as
they have entered into the property in question and dismantled the
building and therefore, their bail orders must be cancelled. Ld.
Magistrate vide impugned order declined the relief of cancellation
of bail by observing that as per the report of the investigating
officer and otherwise, no evidence is found to indicate that accused
persons have been involved in carrying out dismantling of the
property.
-- 1 of 4 --
It has been contended on behalf of petitioner that
accused persons have misused the liberty of bail and damaged the
building by dismantling the portion of the same whereas on behalf
of respondent, it has been submitted that the building has been in
the same situation and there is no material on record to show that
accused persons have been involved in dismantling the property.
The cancellation of bail as sought by the petitioner cannot be
granted without justified grounds.
Revision is filed under Section 397 Cr.P.C which
reads as follows:-
397. Calling for records to exercise powers of revision.-
(1) The High Court or any Sessions Judge may call for
and examine the record of any proceeding before any
inferior Criminal Court situate within its or his local
jurisdiction for the purpose of satisfying itself or himself
as to the correctness, legality or propriety of any finding.
Sentence or order, recorded or passed, and as to the
regularity of any proceedings of such inferior Court, and
may, when calling for such record, direct that the
execution of any sentence or order be suspended, and if
the accused is in confinement, that he be released on bail
or on his own bond pending the examination of the
record.
Explanation – All Magistrates, whether Executive or
Judicial, and whether exercising original or appellate
jurisdiction, shall be deemed to be inferior to the
-- 2 of 4 --
Sessions Judge for the purposes of this sub-section and of
Section 398.
(2) The powers of revision conferred by Sub-Section (1)
shall not be exercised in relation to any interlocutory
order passed in any appeal, inquiry, trial or other
proceeding.
(3) If an application under this section has been made by
any person either to the High Court or to the Sessions
Judge, no further application by the same person shall be
entertained by the other of them.
As a broad preposition, revisional jurisdiction may be
exercised where:-
i. the decision is unjust and unfair,
ii. the decision is grossly erroneous,
iii. there is no compliance with the provisions of
law, the finding of fact affecting the decision
is not based on evidence,
iv. material evidence of the party is not
considered.
v. the judicial discretion is exercised arbitrarily
or perversely.
So far as the nature of impugned order is concerned,
the application is moved by M/s Casa Italia Social Welfare
Association and court declined to cancel the bail granted to the
accused persons. The order is interlocutory in nature and same
does not substantially affect the rights and contentions of the
parties. Therefore, same is not revisable by virtue of Section 397
(2) Cr.P.C.
-- 3 of 4 --
Even if merits of the present revision are concerned,
there is no material on record to suggest that accused persons were
involved in criminal activities by carrying out destruction in the
building / property in question. No FIR or separate complaint has
been maintained with respect to any such incident. No evidence
could be brought on record to show that accused persons have
involved themselves in criminal activites against the spirit of the
bail conditions.
The bail granted to the accused persons cannot be
cancelled without any concrete or convincing material. The issues
raised in the application have not been proved by bringing any
material on record. Ld. Magistrate, therefore, rightly declined the
relief and dismissed the application.
In view of the above observations, I find no illegality
or impropriety in the impugned order dated 01.04.2023. No ground
for interference is made out. Revision is accordingly dismissed.
Copy of this order be sent to the trial court.
The revision file be consigned to the record room.
(Anju Bajaj Chandna)
Principal District & Sessions Judge
New Delhi District, Patiala House Courts
ND/17.11.2025
-- 4 of 4 --