{"id":245665,"date":"2021-03-16T16:29:50","date_gmt":"2021-03-16T10:59:50","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=245665"},"modified":"2021-03-26T11:56:21","modified_gmt":"2021-03-26T06:26:21","slug":"audi-alteram-partem","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/03\/16\/audi-alteram-partem\/","title":{"rendered":"[Audi Alteram Partem] Raj HC | Whether complainant\u2019s revision against dismissal of his complaint, can be decided without giving an opportunity of hearing to the accused petitioner? Court explains\u00a0"},"content":{"rendered":"

Rajasthan High Court:<\/strong> Sanjeev Prakash Sharma, J., disposed of a petition which was filed against the order passed by the Additional Session Judge, Women Atrocity Cases No.1, Kota.<\/p>\n

The counsel for the petitioner, Mr Sudhir Jain submitted that the complainant had challenged the order passed by the Learned ACJM, Kota whereby the protest petition filed by the complainant against the final report submitted by the Investigating Authority no. 229 of 2012 was rejected, however in the Revision Petition, the petitioners who were accused in the complaint were not given an opportunity of hearing.<\/p>\n

The Court observed that at the stage of revision, the Additional Session Judge has not given the opportunity of hearing to the accused petitioners. The Court explained the judgment relied on by the counsel of the petitioner in Manharibhai Muljibhai Kakadla v. Shailesh Bhai Mohanbhai Patel,<\/em> (2012) 10 SCC 517<\/a> wherein the Supreme Court had examined the law Section 401(2) of the Code and decided whether the complainant\u2019s revision against the dismissal of his complaint, could have been decided without opportunity of hearing to the accused petitioner, relevant extract of which is given under,<\/p>\n

\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 \u201c53. We are in complete agreement with the view expressed by this Court in P. Sundarrajan 1 , Raghu Raj Singh Rousha2 and A. N. Santhanam3. We hold, as it must be, that in a revision petition preferred by complainant before the High Court or the Sessions Judge challenging an order of the Magistrate dismissing the complaint under Section 203 of the Code at the stage under Section 200 or after following the process contemplated under Section 202 of the Code, the accused or a person who is suspected to have committed crime is entitled to hearing by the revisional court. In other words, where complaint has been dismissed by the Magistrate under Section 203 of the Code, upon challenge to the legality of the said order being laid by the complainant in a revision petition before the High Court or the Sessions Judge, the persons who are arraigned as accused in the complaint have a right to be heard in such revision petition. This is a plain requirement of Section 401(2) of the Code. If the revisional court overturns the order of the Magistrate dismissing the complaint and the complaint is restored to the file of the Magistrate and it is sent back for fresh consideration, the persons who are alleged in the complaint to have committed crime have, however, no right to participate in the proceedings nor they are entitled to any hearing of any sort whatsoever by the Magistrate until the consideration of the matter by the Magistrate for issuance of process. We answer the question accordingly. The judgments of the High Courts to the contrary are overruled.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n

The Court held that Additional Session Judge had fallen in error in not giving an opportunity of hearing to the accused petitioners and remanding the matter back to the concerned ACJM without giving opportunity of hearing the petitioner. The Court quashed and set aside the order and remanded the matter back to Additional Session Judge to give opportunity of hearing the petitioners before deciding the revision petition filed by the complainant.[Moti Lal Nayak v. State of Rajasthan, 2020 SCC OnLine Raj 2152<\/b><\/a>, decided on 02-01-2020]<\/p>\n

\n

Suchita Shukla, Editorial Assistant has reported this brief.<\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Rajasthan High Court: Sanjeev Prakash Sharma, J., disposed of a petition which was filed against the order passed by the Additional Session <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":67011,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,10],"tags":[21444,29785,2509],"class_list":["post-245665","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-highcourts","tag-audi-alteram-partem","tag-law","tag-Rajasthan_High_Court"],"yoast_head":"\n[Audi Alteram Partem] Raj HC | Whether complainant\u2019s revision against dismissal of his complaint, can be decided without giving an opportunity of hearing to the accused petitioner? Court explains\u00a0 | SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/03\/16\/audi-alteram-partem\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"[Audi Alteram Partem] Raj HC | Whether complainant\u2019s revision against dismissal of his complaint, can be decided without giving an opportunity of hearing to the accused petitioner? Court explains\u00a0\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Rajasthan High Court: Sanjeev Prakash Sharma, J., disposed of a petition which was filed against the order passed by the Additional Session\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/03\/16\/audi-alteram-partem\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SCC Times\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2021-03-16T10:59:50+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2021-03-26T06:26:21+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/02\/IMG_3584-e1487939870879.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"1330\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"887\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Editor\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Editor\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"3 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/03\/16\/audi-alteram-partem\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/03\/16\/audi-alteram-partem\/\",\"name\":\"[Audi Alteram Partem] Raj HC | Whether complainant\u2019s revision against dismissal of his complaint, can be decided without giving an opportunity of hearing to the accused petitioner? Court explains\u00a0 | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2021-03-16T10:59:50+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2021-03-26T06:26:21+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe\"},\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/03\/16\/audi-alteram-partem\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/03\/16\/audi-alteram-partem\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/03\/16\/audi-alteram-partem\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"[Audi Alteram Partem] Raj HC | Whether complainant\u2019s revision against dismissal of his complaint, can be decided without giving an opportunity of hearing to the accused petitioner? Court explains\u00a0\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\",\"name\":\"SCC Times\",\"description\":\"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe\",\"name\":\"Editor\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Editor\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_4\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"[Audi Alteram Partem] Raj HC | Whether complainant\u2019s revision against dismissal of his complaint, can be decided without giving an opportunity of hearing to the accused petitioner? Court explains\u00a0 | SCC Times","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/03\/16\/audi-alteram-partem\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"[Audi Alteram Partem] Raj HC | Whether complainant\u2019s revision against dismissal of his complaint, can be decided without giving an opportunity of hearing to the accused petitioner? Court explains\u00a0","og_description":"Rajasthan High Court: Sanjeev Prakash Sharma, J., disposed of a petition which was filed against the order passed by the Additional Session","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/03\/16\/audi-alteram-partem\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2021-03-16T10:59:50+00:00","article_modified_time":"2021-03-26T06:26:21+00:00","og_image":[{"width":1330,"height":887,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/02\/IMG_3584-e1487939870879.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Editor","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Editor","Est. reading time":"3 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/03\/16\/audi-alteram-partem\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/03\/16\/audi-alteram-partem\/","name":"[Audi Alteram Partem] Raj HC | Whether complainant\u2019s revision against dismissal of his complaint, can be decided without giving an opportunity of hearing to the accused petitioner? Court explains\u00a0 | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"datePublished":"2021-03-16T10:59:50+00:00","dateModified":"2021-03-26T06:26:21+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe"},"breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/03\/16\/audi-alteram-partem\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/03\/16\/audi-alteram-partem\/"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/03\/16\/audi-alteram-partem\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"[Audi Alteram Partem] Raj HC | Whether complainant\u2019s revision against dismissal of his complaint, can be decided without giving an opportunity of hearing to the accused petitioner? Court explains\u00a0"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/","name":"SCC Times","description":"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe","name":"Editor","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Editor"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_4\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":239631,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/11\/25\/all-hc-%e2%94%82-fundamental-principle-of-natural-justice-audi-alteram-partem-cannot-be-violated-court-issues-directions\/","url_meta":{"origin":245665,"position":0},"title":"All HC | Fundamental principle of natural justice audi alteram partem cannot be violated; Court issues directions \u00a0","author":"Editor","date":"November 25, 2020","format":false,"excerpt":"Allahabad High Court: The Division Judge Bench of Surya Prakash Kesarwani and Dr Yogendra Kumar Srivastava, JJ., disposed off a writ petition issuing directions emphasizing upon the rule of audi alteram partem. The writ petition was filed seeking to challenge a communication where the petitioner has been directed to deposit\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":248674,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/05\/25\/audi-alteram-partem-utt-hc-order-passed-without-giving-an-opportunity-to-be-heard-gross-violation-of-natural-justice-court-quashes-order-passed-by-registrar\/","url_meta":{"origin":245665,"position":1},"title":"[Audi alteram partem] Utt HC | Order passed without giving an opportunity to be heard gross violation of natural justice; Court quashes order passed by Registrar","author":"Editor","date":"May 25, 2021","format":false,"excerpt":"Uttaranchal High Court: Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J., allowed petitions which were filed having the common question of law and facts thus were taken together with the consent of parties. The petitioner was elected as Director\/Member of Committee of Management of a Cooperative Society, namely, Buhuddesiya Narsan Gurukul Kisan Sewa Sahkari\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":352230,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/07\/03\/rajasthan-hc-orders-fresh-hearing-for-iit-jee-aspirant-accused-of-using-unfair-means-scc-times-news\/","url_meta":{"origin":245665,"position":2},"title":"Know why Rajasthan High Court directed NTA to decide afresh the case of a JEE (Main), 2025 aspirant accused of using unfair means","author":"Editor","date":"July 3, 2025","format":false,"excerpt":"\u201cIt is a settled proposition of law that whenever any stigmatic order is passed against a person, which causes stigma on his career in future, it is bounden duty of the authority concerned to provide him opportunity of hearing, before passing such an order.\u201d","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"JEE (Main) 2025 Unfair Means","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/JEE-Main-2025-Unfair-Means.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/JEE-Main-2025-Unfair-Means.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/JEE-Main-2025-Unfair-Means.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/JEE-Main-2025-Unfair-Means.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":205921,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/11\/29\/office-order-punishing-government-employee-quashed-for-being-a-non-speaking-order-and-for-disciplinary-authoritys-violation-of-principle-of-audi-alteram-partem\/","url_meta":{"origin":245665,"position":3},"title":"Order punishing government employee quashed in light of disciplinary authority\u2019s violation of principle of audi alteram partem","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"November 29, 2018","format":false,"excerpt":"Patna High Court: A Single Judge Bench comprising of Anil Kumar Upadhyay, J. quashed an office order issued against a delinquent employee ruling that the disciplinary authority had not assigned reasons for the said order and had also not given an opportunity of hearing to the employee. The instant petition\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":353656,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/07\/17\/rajasthan-hc-party-cannot-suffer-due-to-counsels-negligence-scc-times\/","url_meta":{"origin":245665,"position":4},"title":"Rajasthan High Court: Justice should not be compromised by procedural lapses and negligence attributable to counsel","author":"Editor","date":"July 17, 2025","format":false,"excerpt":"\u201cAn appeal against an order of conviction cannot be dismissed in default but must be taken up and decided on merits even if the appellant in person or the counsel representing him is not present.\u201d","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Party cannot suffer due to counsel\u2019s negligence","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/Party-cannot-suffer-due-to-counsels-negligence.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/Party-cannot-suffer-due-to-counsels-negligence.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/Party-cannot-suffer-due-to-counsels-negligence.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/Party-cannot-suffer-due-to-counsels-negligence.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":150364,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2017\/08\/18\/delhi-high-court-emphasizes-on-the-importance-of-audi-alteram-partem\/","url_meta":{"origin":245665,"position":5},"title":"Delhi High Court emphasizes on the importance of Audi Alterem Partem","author":"Saba","date":"August 18, 2017","format":false,"excerpt":"Delhi High Court: A Single Judge Bench of the Delhi High Court emphasized on the importance of Natural Justice. The Court expunged the remarks which were made in a judgment by the trial court in which the petitioner was a supervising officer for a period but not for the entirety\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/245665","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/67011"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=245665"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/245665\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=245665"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=245665"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=245665"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}