Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Narayan Singh Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh

Narayan Singh vs The State of Madhya Pradesh

Type Court Judgment Court Madhya Pradesh Decided Mar 22, 2013
~3 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1045454

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Madhya Pradesh High Court
Decided On
Subject
Education

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Education

Key legal issue
Education

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Narayan Singh

Advocate Shri. Madan Singh

Respondent

The State of Madhya Pradesh

Excerpt

.....for the offence punishable under section 34 (2) of the m.p.excise act and sentenced for 2 years.rigorous imprisonment with fine of rs.25,000/-. during the pendency of the appeal, after hearing the final arguments, the learned sessions judge, damoh passed the judgment dated 17.3.2012, by which the case was remanded for retrial. crr no.925/2012 after considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, it appears that the learned sessions judge thought that he was giving an inspection note to the file of the learned chief judicial magistrate. the appeal was filed by the applicant and there was no appeal from the side of the state and therefore, matter could not be remanded by the learned sessions judge, so that some patching may be done from the side of the prosecution. the learned sessions judge has no power under section 482 of the cr.p.c.even. under such circumstances, in considering the criminal appeal filed by the applicant, the learned sessions judge has passed an order, which is away from the law and procedure. under such circumstances, the judgment dated 17.3.2012 passed by the learned sessions judge, damoh cannot be maintained. consequently, it is a fit case, in which an interference is required from the side of this court, by way of a revision. on the basis of the aforesaid discussion, the revision filed by the applicant is hereby allowed. the judgment dated 17.3.2012 passed by the learned sessions judge, damoh in criminal appeal no.17/2012 is hereby set aside. the appellate crr no.925/2012 court is directed to decide the appeal on merits, according to the law. a copy of the order be sent to the appellate court for information and compliance. certified copy as per rules. (n.k.gupta) judge pushpendra

Full Judgment

CRR No.925/2012 Criminal Revision No.925/2012 22.3.2013 Shri Madan Singh, counsel for the applicants.

Shri S.K.Kashyap, Public Prosecutor for the State/respondent.

As prayed by the learned counsel for the parties,heard them finally.

The applicant has challenged the judgment dated 17.3.2012 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Damoh in criminal appeal No.17/2012, whereby the judgment dated 1.2.2012 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Damoh in criminal case No.3187/2006 was set aside and case was remanded for retrial.

The facts of the case, in short, are that, a prosecution for offence punishable under section 34 (2) of the M.P.Excise Act was initiated against the applicant.

Vide judgment dated 1.2.2012, the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Damoh in criminal case No.3127/2006 convicted the applicant for the offence punishable under section 34 (2) of the M.P.Excise Act and sentenced for 2 yeaRs.rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs.25,000/-.

During the pendency of the appeal, after hearing the final arguments, the learned Sessions Judge, Damoh passed the judgment dated 17.3.2012, by which the case was remanded for retrial.

CRR No.925/2012 After considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, it appears that the learned Sessions Judge thought that he was giving an inspection note to the file of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate.

The appeal was filed by the applicant and there was no appeal from the side of the State and therefore, matter could not be remanded by the learned Sessions Judge, so that some patching may be done from the side of the prosecution.

The learned Sessions Judge has no power under section 482 of the Cr.P.C.even.

Under such circumstances, in considering the criminal appeal filed by the applicant, the learned Sessions Judge has passed an order, which is away from the law and procedure.

Under such circumstances, the judgment dated 17.3.2012 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Damoh cannot be maintained.

Consequently, it is a fit case, in which an interference is required from the side of this Court, by way of a revision.

On the basis of the aforesaid discussion, the revision filed by the applicant is hereby allowed.

The judgment dated 17.3.2012 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Damoh in criminal appeal No.17/2012 is hereby set aside.

The appellate CRR No.925/2012 Court is directed to decide the appeal on merits, according to the law.

A copy of the order be sent to the appellate Court for information and compliance.

Certified copy as per rules.

(N.K.GUPTA) JUDGE Pushpendra

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial