9911796707
TMI Blog2002 (1) TMI 1354X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ictional error in the judgment under challenge. Dismissed 3. The appellant has been convicted under Section 279 read with Section 304A IPC and sentenced to a fine of Rs. 1000/-, in default simple imprisonment for a period of ten days, on the first count and to simple imprisonment for nine months and a fine of Rs. 4,000/-, in default one month's further simple imprisonment, on the latter count. The appeal preferred against conviction and the sentence was dismissed as well as the revision. 4. The learned counsel for the appellant has vehemently urged that the criminal revision has been dismissed by the High Court by means of a non-speaking order. It indicates no reasons to reject the pleas raised by the appellant nor there is any indicati ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... der. We feel that whatever be the outcome of the pleas raised by the appellant on merits, the order disposing of the matter must indicate application of mind to the case and some reasons be assigned for negating or accepting such pleas. We find total absence of the same in the order passed by the High Court quoted in the earlier part of this judgment. As a matter of fact, the order says nothing except that no illegality, impropriety or jurisdictional error was found in the judgment of the courts below. Then abruptly order Dismissed is passed. It is submitted that probably the revision has been disposed of by the High Court having the provisions of Section 115 C.P.C. in mind since the order observe about no jurisdictional error having been c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... : (2000)10SCC338 State of Andhra Pradesh v. Rajagopala Rao in which this Court has set aside the order passed by the High Court in exercise of its revisional jurisdiction on the ground that it amounted to a non-speaking. The case was remanded to the High Court for consideration afresh for its disposal by means of a speaking order. The facts, though in the said case were a bit different since it was an order of acquittal recorded in revision upsetting the finding of two courts below. In the case of Maharashtra State Board (supra), following observations were made: The recording of reasons is also an assurance that the authority concerned consciously applied its mind to the facts on record. It also aids the appellate or revisional authority ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
