[go: up one dir, main page]

0% found this document useful (0 votes)
87 views8 pages

Revision - Kishor Sambherao

1. This document is a judgment from a criminal revision case in the Sessions Court of Panvel, Maharashtra, India. 2. The revision petitioner, Kishor Tulashiram Sambherao, is the accused in a criminal case filed by his wife under sections 498A, 406, 323, 500, 506 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. He had sought an extension to stay in Australia for his job, but the magistrate only granted a 3 month extension. 3. The Sessions Court allowed the revision, setting aside the magistrate's order and granting the requested 1 year extension for the petitioner to stay in Australia. The Court found no evidence the trial was being hamp

Uploaded by

Richa Khatu
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
0% found this document useful (0 votes)
87 views8 pages

Revision - Kishor Sambherao

1. This document is a judgment from a criminal revision case in the Sessions Court of Panvel, Maharashtra, India. 2. The revision petitioner, Kishor Tulashiram Sambherao, is the accused in a criminal case filed by his wife under sections 498A, 406, 323, 500, 506 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. He had sought an extension to stay in Australia for his job, but the magistrate only granted a 3 month extension. 3. The Sessions Court allowed the revision, setting aside the magistrate's order and granting the requested 1 year extension for the petitioner to stay in Australia. The Court found no evidence the trial was being hamp

Uploaded by

Richa Khatu
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 8

1 Criminal 

Revision Appln.No.08/2022
                                                    Kishor Tulashiram Sabhereao V/s. 
                    The State           
                                                   Judgment, Exh. No. 13                           
  

MHRG170003762022

Received on   : 24.02.2022.
         Registered on : 24.02.2022.
              Decided on     :    17.10.2022.
Duration         :    00 07  23    
   Y  M   D     

I   N     T   H   E     S   E   S   S   I   O   N   S     C   O   U   R   T,
P  A  N  V  E  L

(Presided over by K. G. Paldewar, Additional Sessions Judge,
Panvel)

CRIMINAL REVISION NO. 08/2022.         EXHIBIT NO.13.

Kishor Tulashiram Sambherao,
R/o. Flat No.402, Plot No.109,
Aniruddha Vihar, Sector­21,
Ulwe Node, Navi Mumbai,
N.R.I. 400 614,
At present R/o.21A, Peak Street,
Glenwood, NSW, 2768, Australia.     .. PETITIONER.
                                              
       V E R S U S

The State of Maharashtra
Through ­
Police Station, N.R.I. Sagari.           .. RESPONDENT.
2 Criminal Revision Appln.No.08/2022
                                                    Kishor Tulashiram Sabhereao V/s. 
                    The State           
                                                   Judgment, Exh. No. 13                           
  

CLAIM :  REVISION UNDER SECTION 397 OF THE CODE 
OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE.

APPEARANCES:
=­=­=­=­=­=­=­=­=­=­=­=­=­=­=­=­=­=­=­=­=­=­=­=­
Shri. Sudha Dwidvedi, Advocate for Petitioner.
Shri. C.Y.Patil, Additional Public Prosecutor for  Respondent.
=­=­=­=­=­=­=­=­=­=­=­=­=­=­=­=­=­=­=­=­=­=­=­=­

 J U D G M E N T
(Delivered on 17th day of October, 2022)

This   application   is   on   behalf   of   revision   petitioner


vide Section 397 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to set aside
order passed by learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Panvel
in   Regular   Criminal   Case   No.302/2018   vide   Exh.57   Dated
20.12.2021.

2. The prosecution filed reply.

3. Points   for   the   determination   and   my   findings


thereon for the reasons stated below;

SR. NO. POINTS FINDINGS


I Whether   the   revision   is
maintainable   in   view   of   Section
Yes. 
397(2)   of   the   Code   of   Criminal  
Procedure ?
3 Criminal Revision Appln.No.08/2022
                                                    Kishor Tulashiram Sabhereao V/s. 
                    The State           
                                                   Judgment, Exh. No. 13                           
  

II. Whether   the   order   passed   by


 
learned   Magistrate   warrants
Yes.
interference by this court?  

III. What Order ? The revision


petition is
Allowed. 

 R E A S O N S

4. Heard   learned   advocate   Shri.Aditya   Sharma   for


revision petitioner h/f advocate Smt.Sudha Dwivedi, as well as
learned A.P.P. Shri.C.Y.Patil for the State.

AS TO POINT NO.I :

BRIEF FACTS OF REVISION :

5. The present revision petitioner is the accused No.1 in
a prosecution initiated by his wife for the offence under Section
498­A, 406, 323, 500, 506 read with Section 34 of the Indian
Penal Code vide Regular Criminal Case No.302/2018.  The said
case   is   pending   before   learned   magistrate   for   examination   of
witnesses. Presently the stage of the said prosecution is for cross­
4 Criminal Revision Appln.No.08/2022
                                                    Kishor Tulashiram Sabhereao V/s. 
                    The State           
                                                   Judgment, Exh. No. 13                           
  

examination on behalf of accused to the informant.

6. The present revision petitioner has job in abroad as
such, he is staying in Australia.  The applicant has sought leave
of the learned magistrate to travel abroad and to stay over there.
Learned magistrate from time to time has granted the leave and
his extension to stay abroad.  The application vide Exh.57 on his
behalf for his continuation of extension to stay over there for a
period   of   one   more   year.     The   said   application   is   presented
before learned magistrate on 08.12.2021.   Learned magistrate
passed   the   order   Dated   20.12.2021   and   thereby   granted
extension of 3 months only to stay over there. 

7. Now this order of learned magistrate is questioned
before this court in revision. At the outset, the question is raised
in   respect   of   maintainability   of   the   revision.     On   that   count,
learned   advocate   for   revision   petitioner   relied   on   the
observation   of   Hon'ble   Delhi   High   Court   in   the   case   of
Enforcement   Directorate   V/s   Nemichand   Jain   Decided   on
31.01.2008 wherein it is held, "it is once again not disputed that
the bail order would be revisable as it is in the nature of a final
order.     The   restriction   to   travel   abroad   has   been   placed   as   a
condition of the bail order.  Thus once the respondent is permitted
to travel abroad subject to certain terms and conditions, it is the
5 Criminal Revision Appln.No.08/2022
                                                    Kishor Tulashiram Sabhereao V/s. 
                    The State           
                                                   Judgment, Exh. No. 13                           
  

relaxation   of   the   said   order,   hence   revision   would   be


maintainable."

8. Further   relied   on   the   observation   of   Hon'ble   Apex


Court   in   the   case   of  Rajendrakumar   Sitaram   Pandey   V/s.
Uttam Dated 11.02.1999 .

9. Herein   this   case,   learned   magistrate   decided   the


application   vide   Exh.57   for   extension   of   stay   of   revision
petitioner in abroad.   The rights of the parties by virtue of the
said   order   comes   to   an   end   as   such,  the   said   order   attended
finality.  Once the prayer by virtue of said application comes to
an end and the rights of the parties are decided and the said
application is disposed of thus, the said order attended finality
as such, it is not interlocutory order.   The revision against the
said   order   is   maintainable.   I   answer   Point   No.I   in   the
affirmative.

WHETHER   ORDER   PASSED   BY   MAGISTRATE   WARRANTS


INTERFERENCE OF THIS COURT :

10. Needless   to   mention,   the   revision   petitioner   is   the


husband of the informant.  The prosecution under Section 498­A
of   the   Indian   Penal   Code   is   pending  for   cross­examination   to
6 Criminal Revision Appln.No.08/2022
                                                    Kishor Tulashiram Sabhereao V/s. 
                    The State           
                                                   Judgment, Exh. No. 13                           
  

informant.   The in­laws of the informant are appearing before
the learned magistrate for trial.  Learned advocate for husband
is   appearing   for   cross­examination   on   behalf   of   this   revision
petitioner.  The progress of the trial is not hampered.  

11. The husband is in abroad for job. He is not able to
attend the court hearing here as such, his advocate is appearing.
Learned magistrate granted extention of his stay at Australia for
a period of 3 months. This period needs to be extended in terms
of prayer before learned magistrate.   Since there is no incident
that   the   trial   is   hampered   because   of   his   presence   as   such,
learned   magistrate   ought   to   have   allowed   the   prayer   for   his
extension to the extent of one year.   As such, this revision is
filed.   Now, the said period of extension in terms of prayer is
nearing   to   over   in   the   month   of   December   2022.     The   said
extension till 20th December 2022 needs to be granted.

12. Further the hearing of the trial  before learned Trial
court will take a considerable time.   The said hearing will not
get over till December 2022 as such, again the husband has to
apply for further extension to which learned magistrate ought to
consider looking to the grounds specifically whether progress of
the   trial   is   going   to   hamper?     The   grounds   are   justified   to
warrant interference by this court to the order passed by learned
7 Criminal Revision Appln.No.08/2022
                                                    Kishor Tulashiram Sabhereao V/s. 
                    The State           
                                                   Judgment, Exh. No. 13                           
  

magistrate Dated 20.12.2021 and the extension to be granted
for   a   period   of   1   year   from   the   date   of   order   of   learned
magistrate.   I answer Point No.II in the affirmative.With this, I
pass following order ;
O R D E R

1. The revision petition under Section 397 of the Code
of Criminal Procedure is allowed.

2. The Order passed by learned J.M.F.C. Panvel   Dated
20.12.2021   is   set   aside   and   modified   for   grant   of
extension of the period of stay and for continuation of
job at Sydney Australia for a period of one year from
the date of order of magistrate till 20.12.2022.

3. Inform to learned magistrate accordingly.
4. The   revision   petitioner   after  this  above  period  is  at
liberty   to   move   fresh   application   for   extension   and
continuation before learned magistrate.

Dictated and pronounced in Open Court.
Digitally signed by
KRISHNA
KRISHNA GANGADHARRAO
GANGADHARRAO PALDEWAR
PALDEWAR
Date: 2022.10.17
16:01:19 +0530

      ( K.G. Paldewar )
Date   : 17.10.2022.       Additional Sessions Judge,
Place  :   Panvel.                          Panvel.
8 Criminal Revision Appln.No.08/2022
                                                    Kishor Tulashiram Sabhereao V/s. 
                    The State           
                                                   Judgment, Exh. No. 13                           
  

Arguments heard on      21st day of September, 2022
Judgment delivered on      17th day of October, 2022.
Dictated on      17th day of October, 2022.
Transcribed on      17th day of October, 2022.
Checked and signed on      17th day of October, 2022.

C E R T I F I C A T E

I   affirm   that   the   contents   of   this   PDF   file


Judgment/Order   is   same   and   as   per   the   original
Judgment/Order.

Name of the Stenographer        :       P.S.Mhatre
Name of the Court               :       Additional Sessions Court, 
            Panvel
Date of Judgment/Order           :       17.10.2022
Judgment/Order signed on        :      17.10.2022
Presiding Officer            :      K.G. Paldewar
Judgment/Order uploaded on   :      17.10.2022

You might also like