The Madras High Court has clarified that a writ court exercising jurisdiction under Article 226 retains the power to review its own orders under the Madras High Court Writ Rules, 2021, notwithstanding the bar on criminal courts reviewing judgments under Section 362 CrPC or Section 403 BNSS. The Court held that a person named as a proposed accused has no right to a hearing before a direction to register an FIR is issued, and that the State may withdraw a review application where its earlier resistance to a court direction was legally untenable, without such withdrawal constituting an impermissible change of stand for political reasons.
Frequently Asked Questions
Yes. The Madras High Court held that its Writ Rules, 2021 (Rule 29) expressly provide for review of orders passed under Article 226 on grounds under Order XLVII Rule 1 CPC. Section 362 CrPC and Section 403 BNSS bar only criminal courts exercising jurisdiction under the CrPC/BNSS from reviewing their judgments, not a High Court exercising writ jurisdiction under Article 226.
No. The Court held that a direction to register an FIR is a preliminary step that settles no one's guilt. A proposed accused has no right to notice or hearing before such a direction, whether issued by a Magistrate under Section 175(3) BNSS or by a writ court under Article 226. The right to be heard arises during investigation and trial, not at the registration stage.
Yes, where the earlier stand was legally untenable. The Court held that the doctrine of estoppel does not bind the State to persist with an objection that is contrary to law, unreasonable, or unsustainable. Withdrawing a review after complying with the court's direction upholds the rule of law; continuing to resist would undermine it.
No. Section 175(4) BNSS prescribes a specific procedure for a Magistrate acting on a complaint under Section 175(3) BNSS, requiring a report from the public servant's superior and consideration of the public servant's version. This statutory safeguard does not extend to a writ court acting on information forwarded by a statutory agency (here, the ED under Section 66(2) PMLA) showing a prima facie cognizable offence.
