Headnote
The reporters’ summary of the points decided. It is not part of the judgment.
-. [2008] 15 S.C.R. 307
\
GOVERDHAN DASS BANSAL
,. ~ v.
STATE (DELHI ADMINISTRATION) TH. SECRETARY (Criminal Appeal No. 55 of 2002.) OCTOBER 22, 2008
[DR. ARIJIT PASAYAT, C.K. THAKKER, LOKESHWAR SINGH PANTA, JJ.] ~
Practice and procedure - Revision - Disposal of, on the day of admission by cryptic and non-reasoned order Propriety of - Held: Not proper- Since the court felt that there was some arguable points, the revision petition was admitted - If there was no substance, it should not have been admitted - Thus, order of High Court set aside and matter remitted back to it for fresh disposal - Judgment/Order - Revision Food Adulteration Act, 1948.
t c
Judgment
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Criminal Appeal No. 55 of 2002. From the final Judgment and Order dated 17.4.2001 of the High Court of Delhi at New Delhi in Criminal Revision No. 206 of 2001.
r-
Ranjit Kumar, Sr. Adv., Prasanth P. and T. Harish Kumar for the Appellant.
Ashok Bhan, Ahsa G. Nair, Anil Katiyar and D.S. Mahra for the Respondent. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by DR. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J. 1. Heard.
2. Challenge in this appeal is to the order passed by a learned Single Judge of the Delhi High Court in Criminal
•