TaxTMI Login
AI Drafter - (New and Powerful) ✕
Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
Just a moment...
AI Drafter - (New and Powerful) ✕ Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Join Channel
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether an accused person is entitled to notice and an opportunity of hearing in revision proceedings under Section 401(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 before an order prejudicial to him is passed.
Analysis: The revisional court had interfered with the Magistrate's order rejecting the protest-cum-complaint petition and directed fresh proceedings without issuing notice to the accused who stood discharged. Section 401(2) expressly bars the revisional court from making an order to the prejudice of the accused or other person unless he has been given an opportunity of being heard either personally or by pleader. That safeguard applies where the revision seeks reversal of an order that had terminated proceedings in favour of the accused, and the right of hearing is not excluded merely because process had not been issued earlier. The accused, therefore, could not be denied hearing before the High Court took a view adverse to him.
Conclusion: The accused was entitled to notice and hearing in the revision, and the High Court's order passed without complying with Section 401(2) could not stand.
Ratio Decidendi: In revision, no order prejudicial to an accused or other person can be passed without affording him an opportunity of being heard, and this protection applies even where the revisional challenge may revive a complaint or other terminated proceeding.
TaxTMI 
