IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Criminal Misc. Application No.643 of 2010 (U/s 482 of Cr.P.C.) Anil Kumar Saxena … Petitioner Versus State of Uttarakhand & another … Respondents Dated: July 21, 2010 Sri Arvind Vashisth, learned counsel for the petitioner Sri Amit Bhatt, Addl. GA for the State/respondent no.1 HON. DHARAM VEER, J. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the material on record. By means of this application, the applicant has prayed to quash the order dated 2.6.2010 passed by the JM, Kashipur in Criminal Case No.1057 of 2010, and the order dated 6.7.2010 passed by the Sessions Judge, US Nagar in Crl. Appeal No.90 of 2010. Vide order dated 2.6.2010 passed by the Judicial Magistrate, Kashipur, the bail of petitioner was cancelled, non-bailable warrants were directed to be issued against the petitioner and the surety bonds were forfeited and proceedings u/s 82 Cr.P.C. was also directed to be issued against the petitioner as well as the notice u/s 446 Cr.P.C. was also issued against the sureties. Against the said order dated 2.6.2010, the petitioner went in appeal which was dismissed by the Sessions Judge, US Nagar vide order dated 6.7.2010 at the admission stage itself. Hence this petition. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the order dated 2.6.2010 passed by the J.M. Kashipur is an appealable order as per Section 449 Cr.P.C. and the learned Sessions Judge has dismissed the appeal without deciding the same on merits. He further argued that it is a settled law that once a criminal appeal is filed, that shall be decided on merits only. He drew attention of the Court towards Section 449 Cr.P.C. which reads as under: - “449. Appeals from orders under Section 446- All orders passed under Section 446 shall be appealable- (i) in the case of an order made by a Magistrate, to the Sessions Judge (ii) in the case of an order made by a Court of Sessions, to the Court of which an appeal lies from an order may by such Court.” After hearing learned counsel for the parties and perusal of the papers available on record, it transpires that the learned Sessions Judge has not passed any order on merits while dismissing the appeal of the petitioner, which was preferred against the order dated 2.6.2010 passed by the J.M. Kashipur. Hence the order dated 6.7.2010 passed by the Sessions Judge, US Nagar is hereby set aside. The Sessions Judge, US Nagar is directed to decide the appeal of the petitioner against the order-dated 2.6.2010, on merits. Subject to the aforesaid observations, the petition is finally disposed of. (Dharam Veer, J.) July 21, 2010 Rajeev Dang