Allowed

Radhey Shyam Dixit and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC29 May 2018A227/3956/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Supreme Court quashed the Sessions Judge's order setting aside an order under Section 145 Cr.P.C. and remanding it for fresh consideration, holding the impugned order functional and not an abuse of process. Petitioner lacked merit.

What did the court decide?

Quashing of the order dated 05.05.2018 passed by Sessions Judge, Deoria in Criminal Revision No.49 of 2018.

Radhey Shyam Dixit and Another Vs State of… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 48

¶2

Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 3956 of 2018

¶3

Petitioner :- Radhey Shyam Dixit And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Petitioner :- Sushil Kumar Mishra Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Karuna Nand Bajpayee,J.

¶5

This petition has been moved on behalf of petitioners seeking the quashing of order dated 05.05.2018 passed by the Sessions Judge, Deoria in Criminal Revision No.49 of 2018 (Ramdev Dixit vs. State and another), whereby order dated 12.03.2018 passed by the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Salempur, DistrictDeoria in Case No.72 of 2018 (Radhey Shyam Dixit and others vs. Ramdev and others) u/s 145 of Cr.P.C., P.S.-Bhatni, DistrictDeoria, has been set aside and the court below has been directed to pass afresh order in accordance with law considering all the documentary evidence adduced and affording opportunity of hearing to both the parties.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and and learned A.G.A.

¶7

Perused the record.

¶8

Counsel for the petitioner has not been able to point out any such illegality, impropriety or incorrectness much less than any abuse of court's process on the basis of which the impugned order may be castigated. The matter has been remanded back to the court below with certain direction and to pass reasonable order in accordance with law after considering all the objections and documentary evidence and the written statement that had been filed on behalf of revisionists in the court below. The order is innocuous and can hardly be flawed on any ground. Moreover, no adverse order has been passed after the revision

¶9

was allowed. The remand order is only containing the direction to reconsider the matter on merits. It does not necessarily say as to what should be the fate of the order. In the considered opinion of the revisional court the non-consideration of some relevant material the court below was in breach of principles of natural justice as the version and the stand point of the other side had remained unconsidered. This court does not see it a fit case in which the impugned order may be quashed.

¶10

The petitioner lacks merit and the same therefore stands dismissed.

¶11

Order Date :- 29.5.2018 M. Kumar

Radhey Shyam Dixit and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Radhey Shyam Dixit and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Munib and 4 others Vs State of U.P. and another

Nanhey Lal Vs State of U.P.

Rajendra Prasad Vs State of U.P.

Nimala Devi Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Dinesh Pathak and 3 Others Vs State of Up and Another

Rekha and 2 Others Vs State of Up and Another