Ankit Patel Vs the State of Jharkhand

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶2

Cr. Rev. No. 1035 of 2024

¶3

‘XXX’

¶4

CORAM :HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY

¶5

--For the Petitioner : Mr. Devesh Ajmani, Advocate For the Opp. Party : Ms. Shweta Singh, Advocate ---

¶6

09 /08.01.2025

¶7

1. The learned counsel for the parties are present.

¶8

2. This revision petition has been filed for challenging the legality, propriety and correctness of the Judgment dated 30.11.2023 passed by Additional Sessions Judge-I, East Singhbhum, Jamshedpur in Criminal Appeal No. 180 of 2023 whereby the appeal preferred under Section 101 of Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act against the order dated 04.07.2023 passed by learned Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Jamshedpur in connection with Sidhgora P.S. Case No. 36 of 2023 was dismissed and thereby the order dated 04.07.2023 passed by the learned Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Jamshedpur in connection with Sidhgora P.S case No. 36 of 2023 registered under Sections 363, 364, 34 of the Indian Penal Code and later vide order dated 18.03.2023 Sections 302 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code were added and the bail application of the petitioner was rejected.

¶9

3. The learned counsel for the opposite party has submitted that against the same order the petitioner had filed a criminal revision application being Criminal Revision No. 173 of 2024 and the revision was dismissed. She submits that fresh revision against the same impugned order is not maintainable. She has referred to an order dated

¶10

1

¶11

16.05.2017 passed in Criminal Revision No. 195 of 2017 by Hon’ble Patna High Court and has submitted that in the said case it was held that second revision is not maintainable. She has submitted that if the present revision is entertained and an order is passed the same would amount to review of the order passed by this Court which is not prescribed under the provisions of Cr.P.C.

¶12

4. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has filed this revision against the same impugned order considering the fact that it was only the bail application of the petitioner which was rejected by the impugned order and accordingly he submits that there is no requirement in law for the petitioner to approach the learned court again for the purposes of seeking bail as the bail application ultimately stood rejected by this court in Criminal Revision No. 173 of 2024 whereby this Court refused to enlarge the petitioner on bail.

¶13

5. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and considering the facts and circumstances of this case, this Court is of the considered view that once the order dated 30.11.2023 which is impugned in the present case was subject matter of revision in Criminal Revision No. 173 of 2024 and the revision was rejected, the second revision against the same order is not maintainable and accordingly, no relief can be granted to the petitioner in this revision application.

¶14

6. This criminal revision is hereby dismissed.

¶15

7. Pending I.A., if any, is closed.

¶16

8. Name and other details of the petitioner should reflect as ‘XXX’ in this order while uploading in the official web-site of this Court.

¶17

9. Let a copy of this order be communicated to the court concerned through ‘FAX/E-mail’.

¶18

(Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.)

¶19

Rakesh/-