Sri Haridwar Pandey vs The State of Bihar

Honourable Mr. Justice Shailesh Kumar Sinha

Heard petitioner Shri Haridwar Pandey, in person. This is an application for review of the order dated 5th April 2011 passed in Criminal Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 420 2010 under order 47 Rule 1 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure.

The said writ application was filed alleging violation of the mandatory procedure in conduct of the criminal trial in connection with Special Case No. 158 of 1983 arising out of Vigilance Case No. 37(4)/78 pending in the court of Special Court Vigilance -1, Bihar Patna.

The petitioner, as per the above writ application, prayed for a direction to the court below and also prosecution who were alleged the inconnivance with the vigilance police for the alleged violation of the procedure of the criminal trial in question, since the provision of Section 7(A) (a) of the Prevention of Corruption Act 1947 equivalent to Section 22 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 was being not followed. The said writ application upon hearing was dismissed on merits by order dated 5th of April 2011.

The petitioner has sought review of the aforesaid order dated 5th of April 2011. In view of the order dated 30th of March 2012, the question of maintainability of this Civil Review is being considered at the time of hearing of this case in admission matter.

Petitioner in support of his submissions submits that the present civil review application is maintainable in view of the order dated 21st of April 2012 passed in Civil Review No. 275 of 2009 and the order dated 20th of September, 2010 passed in L.P.A. No. 1378 of 2010 as contained in annexures 5 and 6 to the supplementary affidavit. It is also submitted that the filing of this civil review application by the petitioner who is appearing in person was accepted, although with a direction that stamp report be made. Therefore, the above civil review is maintainable. Bedsides the above, it is further submitted that Section 362 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 (Cr.P.C) prohibits the review of a judgement on final order disposing of a case except for to correct a clerical or arithmetical error and since the order dated 5th of April 2011 in the aforesaid Criminal Writ Jurisdiction No. 420 of 2010 being not a final order, the aforesaid section 362 of the Cr.P.C. may not come into the way.

On perusal of the order dated 24.04.2010 passed in Civil Review No. 275 of 2009, as contained in Annexure -5 to the supplementary affidavit, it would appear that the said civil review was filed for review of the order dated 26.08.2009 passed in Contempt Application vide M.J.C. No. 1381 of 2003. The said review application was dismissed on merit. The appeal vide L.P.A. No. 1378 of 2010 against the aforesaid was equally dismissed by order dated 20.09.2010 as contained in Annexure-6 to the supplementary affidavit.

In the instant case, petitioner seeks review of the order passed in Criminal Writ Jurisdiction No. 420 of 2010. No provision of the CPC provides for review of an order passed in a criminal writ jurisdiction arising out from a criminal trial. Section 362 of Cr.P.C. clearly prohibits review of judgement or the final order. By order dated 05.04.2011, the said criminal writ application alleging non-compliance of the provisions of Section 22 of the Prevention of Corruption Act 1988 in the connected criminal trial was finally heard and dismissed on merits. The said order was final order.

The submission of the petitioner that filing of the civil review was accepted taking into consideration that civil review has been filed in person, as such, it is maintainable.

The above submission was noticed, only to be rejected. For the reasons and discussions made above, I find that this civil review for review of the order dated 05.04.2011 passed in Criminal Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 420 of 2010 is not maintainable and is accordingly dismissed.