9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (9) TMI 1757X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y. The said liberty does not give right to a litigant fresh/anew to agitate the same issue/order which has attained finality. The liberty may confer a right to the petitioner to file a petition, but it does not confer jurisdiction upon the Court to probe into the correctness or the validity of the order under challenge. Review of a judgment cannot be had on this liberty. This Court is of the opinion that only because liberty is granted does not mean that the subsequent proceeding is maintainable in the eyes of law or that it calls upon the successor Court to hold subsequent petition maintainable or pass an order setting aside the order passed by the Court granting liberty. The successor Court is not bound to hold the proceeding maintain ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er herein filed a complaint in the Court of Metropolitan Magistrate, 39th Court, Vile Parle (West). Since there was non-compliance of the notice till 8.3.2011, the petitioner had come to a conclusion that the respondents had committed an offence punishable under Section 475A(1)(a) of the said Act. The learned Magistrate upon perusing the complaint, had passed an order on 2.8.2011 directing that the complaint be registered as Misc. Application. Notice was issued to the accused. Along with the complaint, the petitioner had filed an application seeking condonation of delay. 4. On 9.9.2011, the learned Magistrate had passed an order as follows:- Perused the delay condonation application. There is delay of near about 2 months to file this ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... quittal. As such, in my view, the order passed by the learned Magistrate for discharging the accused does not amount to acquittal. In fact, it amounts to return of the complaint to the complainant. As such, no appeal can lie against such order. The application is, therefore, dismissed with liberty to the applicant to file appropriate proceedings including an application under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. They are advised to do so. 6. The learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently submits that since the Hon'ble Court had granted, liberty to file a writ petition, the petitioner has filed the present Writ Petition in the year 2012. It is pertinent to note that initially this Writ Petition was circulated before the Hon'ble Division Ben ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as to how this Court on the second occasion can interfere with the same impugned order in a Writ Petition after the application seeking leave to appeal is dismissed by the same Forum. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that non-compliance of the first notice issued to the respondent is by itself an offence and non-compliance is a continuing offence and therefore there is no question of limitation. The learned counsel submits in fact an application seeking leave to appeal was maintainable as the accused were discharged but only because the Court granted him liberty to file Writ Petition he has filed Writ Petition. The learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that since it is a continuing offence, there is no question o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
