JUDGMENT 1. - This revision petition has been filed against the order dated 15.22.011 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Ajmer whereby revisional Court has ordered that the present petitioners should be called by the trial Court and fresh hearing regarding framing of charge should be made. 2. The contention of the present petitioner is that he has been discharged from the alleged offence by the trial Court vide order dated 17.1.2008. On revision, without affording opportunity of hearing to him, order has been passed and the matter has been remanded back to the trial Court for fresh hearing on the point of charge. Hence, this revision petition. 3. The only contention of the present petitioner is that looking to the provisions of Section 401, Criminal Procedure Code, when an order of discharge has been passed in his favour, the revisional Court should not pass an order against him without giving an opportunity of hearing. 4. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.Section 401, Criminal Procedure Code, reads as follows: "401. High Court's Powers of Revisions.-(1) In the case of any proceeding the record of which has been called for by itself or which otherwise comes to its knowledge, the High Court may, in its discretion, exercise any of the powers conferred on a Court of Appeal by Sections 386, 389, 390 and 391 or on a Court of Session by Section 307 and, when the Judges composing the Court of revision are equally divided in opinion, the case shall be disposed of in the manner provided by Section 392. (2) No order under this section shall be made to the prejudice of the accused or other person unless he has had an opportunity of being heard either personally or by pleader in his own defence. (3) Nothing in this section shall be deemed to authorise a High Court to convert a finding of acquittal into one of conviction. (4) Where under this Code an appeal lies and no appeal is brought, no proceeding by way of revision shall be entertained at the instance of the party who could have appealed. (3) Nothing in this section shall be deemed to authorise a High Court to convert a finding of acquittal into one of conviction. (4) Where under this Code an appeal lies and no appeal is brought, no proceeding by way of revision shall be entertained at the instance of the party who could have appealed. (5) Where under this Code an appeal lies but an application for revision has been made to the High Court by any person and the High Court is satisfied that such application was made under the erroneous belief that no appeal lies thereto and that it is necessary in the interests of justice so to do, the High Court may treat the application for revision as a petition of appeal and deal with the same accordingly. 5. A bare perusal of the above provision goes to show that no order under revision petition could be passed against the person without giving him an opportunity of hearing. In the present case, the present petitioner has been discharged by the trial Court. Hence, the order has been passed in his favour and without giving opportunity of hearing, the revisional Court has quashed the order of discharge and remanded the matter back to the trial Court and the order of revisional Court is in violation of principles of natural justice as also requirement of law as provided under Section 401, Criminal Procedure Code, and hence order of the revisional Court is perverse and liable to be quashed.Looking at the above, this revision petition is allowed and the impugned order dated 18.3.2011 is quashed and set aside and the matter is remanded back to the revisional Court for fresh hearing after giving opportunity of hearing to both the parties. Both the parties will appear before the revisional Court on 3.7.2012.Revision allowed. *******