1. Heard Mr. R. Saikia, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. R.H. Nabam, learned Public Prosecutor for the State of Arunachal Pradesh.

2. This application has been filed under sections 401 and 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, for setting aside and quashing the order dated 19.03.2009 passed by the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court, Basar, whereby the acceptance of pardon tendered by the petitioner under section 307 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, as an approver, vide order dated 24.1.2005 passed by the learned Addl. Session Judge, FTC, Basar, has been revoked and framed charge against the petitioner, under section 376/34, IPC.

3. From the LCR, it is found that after committal of the case in connection with Likabali P.S. Case No. 03/2003 under sections 354/376/511 read with section 34, IPC, to the court of learned Additional District & Session Judge, Fast Track Court, Basar, the accused petitioner tendered pardon under section 307 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 and he was discharged from the charge levelled against him in the said case by an order dated 24.1.2005 passed by the learned Additional District & Session Judge, Fast Track Court, Basar, in BSR/SESS. Case No. 484/2004 under sections 376/34, IPC. The case proceeded against the co-accused. The presiding judge who passed the aforesaid order dated 24.1.2005 was transferred and in his place, a new incumbent took over the charge who passed the impugned order dated 19.3.2009 revoking the earlier order dated 24.1.2005 and framed the charge against the accused petitioner.

4. I have perused the connected LCRs produced before this court by Mr. R.H. Nabam, learned Public Prosecutor for the State of Arunachal Pradesh. From the records, it is seen that no application was made by the learned Public Prosecutor before the aforesaid learned trial court for revocation of the earlier order dated 24.1.2005. The certification of tender of pardon passed earlier could be revoked only after observing the procedure under section 308 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The aforesaid Section 308 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, provides, as under:

5. The law requires certification from the Public Prosecutor and the court would pass necessary order only after hearing him and the approver whose tender of pardon was accepted earlier. The certificate of the Public Prosecutor to the effect that the conditions of pardon have been violated/broken, is an essential prerequisite. In the present case, from the records, it is found that the learned Public Prosecutor did not certify to the effect that in his opinion, the accused petitioner has been willfully concealing anything essential or giving false evidence and thereby, did not comply with the condition on which the tender was made.

6. In view of the above, the impugned order dated 19.3.2009 passed by the learned Additional District & Session Judge, Fast Track Court, Basar, in BSR/SESS. No. 484/04 is found to be in contravention of the provision under section 308 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 and as such, it

is liable to be quashed and set aside. Accordingly, the aforesaid impugned order dated 19.3.2009 is set aside and quashed. Resultantly, the instant petition succeeds. However, there shall be no order as to costs. 7. LCRs be remitted back forthwith to the court below concerned to proceed with the trial of the case in accordance with law.