High CourtsSingle Bench(2011) 09 GUJ CK 0031

Medical Registrar vs Manibhai Bhagabhai Patel and Another

Gujarat High Court · Decided on 6 September 2011

HON’BLE JUDGES
Mukesh R. Shah, J
CASE NUMBER
Special Criminal Application No. 1501 of 2010

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

5 paragraphs · 579 words

M.R. Shah, J.

1.0. Present Special Criminal Application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been preferred by the Petitioner to quash and set aside the impugned order dated 2/3/2010 rendered by the learned Revisional Court i.e. learned 2nd Additional District Judge, Surat passed in Criminal Revision Application No. 308 of 2009 and to restore the order passed by the learned Magistrate (Municipal) Surat dated 18.09.2009 passed in Miscellaneous Application No. 486 of 2009.

2.0. It appears that Respondent No. 1 submitted the application before the learned Magistrate for making necessary entry in the register maintained under the provision of Registration of Births and Death Act, 1969 with respect to birth of one Babubhai Ramabhai Patel and to register his date of birth is 7.10.1963. The said application came to be dismissed by the learned Magistrate by order dated 18.9.2009. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the judgment and order passed by the learned Magistrate (Municipal), Surat dated 18.9.2009 passed in Miscellaneous Application No. 486 of 2009,Respondent No. 1 preferred revision application before the learned Sessions Court, Surat being Criminal Revision Application No. 308 of 2009 and by impugned judgment and order dated 2.3.2010 the Revisional Court has allowed the said Revision Application directing the Petitioner to make necessary entry in the register maintained under the provision of Registration of Births and Death Act, 1969 and to consider his date of birth as 7.10.1963. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned order passed by the learned Revisional Court, the Petitioner has preferred the present Special Criminal Application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.

3.0. After the matter was argued for some time, there is a broad consensus between the learned advocates for the parties that let the impugned judgment and order passed by the learned 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Surat dated 2.3.2010 passed in Criminal Revision Application No. 308 of 2009 as well as order passed by the learned Magistrate (Municipal)Surat dated 18.09.2009 passed in Miscellaneous Application No. 486 of 2009 be quashed and set aside with a liberty in favour of Respondent No. 1 or his nephew Babubhai Ramabhai Patel to submit the application before the concerned Magistrate and the learned Magistrate to consider the said application in accordance with law and on merits and permitting the parties to lead appropriate evidence. Learned advocate for the respective parties do not invite any further reasoned order.

4.0. In view of the above and for the reasons stated above and broad consensus between the learned advocates for the respective parties recorded hereinabove, the order dated 2/3/2010 rendered by the learned Revisional Court i.e. learned 2nd Additional District Judge, Surat passed in Criminal Revision Application No. 308 of 2009 and order passed by the learned Magistrate (Municipal) Surat dated 18.09.2009 passed in Miscellaneous Application No. 486 of 2009 are hereby quashed and set aside. Liberty is reserved in favour of Respondent No. 1 or Shri Babubhai Ramabhai Patel nephew of Respondent No. 1 to submit an appropriate application before the learned Magistrate, which shall be considered in accordance with law and on merits and on appreciation of evidence, which may be led by the parties and without in any way being influenced by the impugned orders and even the present order. As and when, such an application is made, the same shall be disposed of within a period of six months from the date of receipt of the said application. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent.