6(Madan B. Lokur and Adarsh Kumar Goel, JJ.)
Raish Khan ________________ Appellant
v.
State of Rajasthan ___________ Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 1900 of 2009, decided on February 25, 2015
The Order of the court was delivered by
Order
We have heard learned counsel for the parties and find that the High Court has not at all discussed the merits of the case. After recording the submissions of the parties, the High Court has observed in the first appeal against the judgment of conviction as follows:
“From a bare perusal of the facts of the case, statements of the prosecution witnesses and also record of the case, it is clear that the trial court has not committed any illegality or irregularity in passing the impugned judgment. In my considered view as also in the interest of justice, no interference is required to be made in the impugned judgment passed by the trial court.”
Since the matter in the High Court was a first appeal, the High Court ought to have considered the evidence on record and then given its findings on the basis of the available material and submissions made.
We may only mention that in Prasad alias Hari Prasad Acharya v. State of Karnataka [(2009) 3 SCC 174] it has been observed that reasons ought to be given in a case such as the present.
Under the circumstances, we set aside the impugned judgment and order and remand the matter back to the High Court for a fresh consideration on merits and for giving a reasoned decision.
The appellant is already on bail. This will continue till the disposal of the appeal or any other order that may be passed by the High Court while dealing with the matter.
The criminal appeal is disposed of.
———
