WP.2133-09 - 1 - VPH IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION No. 2133 OF 2009 Ramdas Gaman Pagar ...Petitioner Vs. Devichand Uttamchand Surana & Ors. ...Respondents *** Mr. Tushar Sonawane, for the Petitioner. Mr. Rahul Motkari, for Respondent No.1. Mr. P. S. Hingorani, APP for Respondent-State. *** CORAM: V. M. KANADE J. DATE : SEPTEMBER 28, 2010 P.C. 1. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and respondent No.1. The grievance of the petitioner /original complainant is that the revision application filed by him for enhancement of the sentence awarded, and also for seeking compensation, was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Court by a cryptic, non reasoned order. I have perused the impugned order. No reasons have been assigned assigned for dismissing the revision application. It is expected that before passing any WP.2133-09 - 2 - order either allowing or dismissing the revision application, the Court should record the reasons why the revision application is dismissed. 2. In the present case a cryptic order has been passed as under- “6/- It is the fact that respondent is convicted and sentenced to suffer S.I. for 3 months and to pay fine of Rs.500/-. It is the fact that no order of compensation is passed. 7/- To pass order is discretion of the court, therefore, there is no illegality, in the order passed by the trial court. 8/- Moreover, it is revision and in the revision one should see whether is any illegality in the order passed by the trial Court. 9/- I am of the opinion that the petitioner should have preferred appeal against the said impugned judgment. 10/- I therefore decided the Point No.1, in the affirmative. 11/- In the result, I proceed to pass the following order. : Order : Revision is hereby dismissed.” 3. In my view, no reasons are assigned and therefore, on that ground alone, the impugned order is liable to be set aside. The writ WP.2133-09 - 3 - petition is therefore allowed. The matter is remanded back to the Sessions Court, Nashik and the Sessions Court should decide the criminal revision application afresh, as expeditiously as possible on merits and in accordance with law, possibly within a period of six weeks. [ V. M. KANADE J.]