http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 1  

PETITIONER: LASHKARI RAM & ORS

       Vs.

RESPONDENT: MAST RAM TANTA & ANR.

DATE OF JUDGMENT:       01/09/1998

BENCH: G.T.NANAVATI, S.P.KURDUKAR

ACT:

HEADNOTE:

JUDGMENT:  JUDGMENT NANAVATI. J. In this appeal, filed by some of the officers of the Himacahal Pradesh Government, what is called in question are the remarks made against  them  by  the  High  Court,  while disposing of Criminal Revision No.  56/82. Respondent  No.1  Mast  Ram  Tanta  was tried by the Court  of  Sub-Divisional  Magistrate,  Theog  for   certain offences  punishable  under  the  Indian  Penal Code and the Forest Act.   Respondnt  No.    1  pleaded  quilty  and  was sentenced to  pay fine only.  The High Courtfinding that the sentence imposed upon Respondent No.  1 was  inadequate,  in exercise  of  its  sub  moto  powers,  issued  notice to him calling him to show cause why the  sentence  should  not  be enhanced.   During  those  proceedings  the High Court found that the whole trial was conducted in an  unholy  haste  and there was  plea bargaining.  Therefore, instead of enhancing the sentence it thought it proper to quash the  whole  trial and remanded the case back to the trial court for conducting the trial   afresh.      While  disposing  of  the  Revision Application in that  manner  the  High  Court  made  certain observations against the present appellants. Having gone through the judgment, we find  that  the said  observations  are  part and parcel of the reasoning of the High Court and they have been  made  while  appreciating the evidence on record. Those observations are a part of the reasoning of the High Court. They cannot be expunged because that  will  amount  to removing the very foundation on which the High Court judgment is based. We, therefore, dismiss this appeal.