1 revn.340.11.sxw IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION. Criminal Revision Application No. 340 of 2011 Mr. Prashant Ganesh Raut ....Applicant v/s. The State of Maharashtra ....Respondent Mr. Niranjan Mundargi for the applicant. Mr. D.R. More-APP for the State. CORAM: B.R. GAVAI, J. 8th August, 2011 PC: Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally by consent of the parties. 2. The grievance of the present petitioner is that the learned Sessions Judge has framed the charges without the petitioner being given an appropriate opportunity of hearing prior to framing of the charges. The learned Counsel submits that only on the 2nd date, even the petitioner had yet to engage the lawyer, charges are framed by the learned Judge. 3. From the Roznama the contention appears to be correct. The charges framed by the learned Session Judge are quashed and set aside. The learned Session Judge is directed to give an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner prior to framing of the charges afresh. 4. Rule is made absolute in the aforesaid terms with no order as to costs. (B.R. GAVAI, J)