9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (7) TMI 1949X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ction 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, as the orders passed by the learned trial Court as well as by the learned Revisional Court are in accordance with law. So, these needs no interference. Petition dismissed. - Cr. MMO No. 523 of 2018 - - - Dated:- 10-7-2019 - Chander Bhusan Barowalia, J. For the Appellant: Shyam Singh Chauhan, Advocate For the Respondent: Nitin Thakur, Advocate ORDER Chander Bhusan Barowalia, J. 1. The present petition has been maintained by the petitioner/accused under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for quashing and setting aside the order dated 04.08.2018 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge (1), Shimla, H.P. in Cr. Revision No. 6-S/10 of 2018. 2. Briefly s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssed the application filed by the petitioner on 16.2.2018. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied, the petitioner filed a Criminal Revision under Section 397 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, against the order dated 16.2.2018 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Shimla before the learned Additional Sessions Judge (I), Shimla and the same was dismissed on 04.8.2018. 6. The learned trial Court vide order dated 16.2.2018, dismissed the application of the petitioner. Thereafter, he maintained the revision petition before the learned Lower Revisional Court and filed a criminal revision petitioner under Section 397 of the Code, which was also dismissed. The petitioner wants to prove on record by way of application that he has not filled ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n its reversal in this revision, the proceedings would culminate in entirety? Even if, the contention of the revision petitioner is accepted, as correct, and the revision petition is allowed, still the proceedings before the learned trial Court will not come to an end. Even if, it is assumed that the plea of petitioner is accepted and his revision is allowed, so, the impugned order is purely interlocutory in nature and the revision against it is not maintainable. 12. The accused while answering Question No. 7 of his statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C., which reads as under:- Q. No. 7. It has further come in the evidence of the complainant led against you accused that on 14.01.2015, you accused issued and executed Cheque No. 02 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
