Full Judgment Text
NonReportable
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1208 OF 2018
(Arising out of S.L.P.(Crl.) No.5055 of 2016)
Harish Chand …..Appellant(s)
VERSUS
Smt. Urmila …..Respondent(s)
J U D G M E N T
Abhay Manohar Sapre, J.
1. Leave granted.
2. This appeal is directed against the final judgment
and order dated 24.02.2016 passed by the High
Court of Judicature for Rajasthan at Jaipur in S.B.
Criminal Revision Petition No.196 of 2014 whereby
the Single Judge of the High Court dismissed the
revision petition filed by the appellant herein for
Signature Not Verified
Digitally signed by
ANITA MALHOTRA
Date: 2018.09.20
16:51:17 IST
Reason:
quashing and setting aside the order dated
1
17.01.2014 of the Judge, Family Court, Bharatpur in
Application No.352/13.
3.
Few facts need to be mentioned infra for the
disposal of this appeal, which involve a short point.
4. The appellanthusband has filed this appeal by
way of special leave against the order whereby the
High Court dismissed his revision petition by passing
the following order:
“I have heard learned counsel for the
respective parties and carefully scanned the
entire material made available to me
including the impugned order passed by the
learned court below as also the fact that the
petitioner is working as a headmaster/senior
teacher in Government school and he is
capable to maintain the respondent.”
5. In our view, the Single Judge of the High Court
neither set out the facts nor considered any
submissions of the parties and nor assigned any
reasons and disposed of the revision petition in a
cryptic manner. Indeed, it is clear from a mere
reading of only one para from the impugned order
2
quoted supra which was made the basis for
dismissing the revision petition.
6. In the absence of any facts mentioned,
submissions of both the parties noted, legal
provisions which govern the issue arising in the case
referred and the reasons assigned in the impugned
order by the Single Judge in the context of the
submissions urged, we are unable to know the
factual background of the dispute involved in the
case, the reasoning of the Trial Court which led the
appellant herein to file a revision petition before the
High Court against the order of the Trial Court and
lastly, the reasoning of the High Court for dismissal
of the appellant’s revision petition.
7. We cannot countenance the disposal of the
revision petition by the High Court in such a cryptic
manner and, therefore, decline to concur with such
order.
8. In view of what is observed supra, we do not
wish to go into the issue on merits for the first time
3
in this appeal and consider it proper to set aside the
impugned order and remand the case to the High
Court for deciding the revision petition afresh on
merits strictly in accordance with law keeping in view
our observations made supra.
9. The appeal thus succeeds and is accordingly
allowed. Impugned order is set aside. The revision
petition out of which this appeal arises is remanded
to the High Court for its disposal on merits in
accordance with law, as mentioned above, as
expeditiously as possible preferably within six
months as an outer limit.
.……...................................J.
[ABHAY MANOHAR SAPRE]
.……...................................J.
[S. ABDUL NAZEER]
New Delhi,
September 20, 2018.
4