The State Of Uttar Pradesh vs Mohammad Naim on 15 March, 1963
13. The tests laid down in the case of Mohammad
Naim (supra), if applied in the present case, would
Pr
appear that the petitioner did not have an opportunity to
a
reply the said circumstances wherein, opportunity could
hy
not be given to the petitioner to explain the
ad
circumstances by the learned JMFC. As it is not the case
M
of the State that petitioner was afforded an opportunity to
explain those circumstances, therefore, the adverse
of
remarks were neither necessary nor justifiable. In the
rt
test mentioned above, the adverse remarks at Para 15
ou
made by the learned JMFC is, therefore, uncalled for. As
such retention of those remarks would cause legal
C
enquiry to the petitioner as he has been proposed to face
h
ig
a departmental enquiry on one hand and on the other
H
hand, the remarks will affect his career.