Disposed

Kishan @ Ramadhar v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Allahabad HC18 Jul 2018CRLR/1731/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Criminal Revision against an order dismissing a custody application in a case involving non-marital relations was disposed of. The High Court did not interfere, noting the victim's expressed desire to withdraw and the accused's request to avoid litigation.

What did the court decide?

The revision was disposed of; the prosecution may be withdrawn subject to the opposite party making a statement before the police.

Kishan @ Ramadhar Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 49

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 1731 of 2018

¶3

Revisionist :- Kishan @ Ramadhar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Revisionist :- Ashok Kumar Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Anurag Shukla,K.B. Dixit,K.B.Dixit

¶4

Hon'ble Saumitra Dayal Singh,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and learned counsel for the opposite party nos. 2 and 3.

¶6

The present criminal revision is being preferred against the impugned order dated 4.4.2018 passed by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mainpuri, in Case Crime No. 522 of 2017 (State Vs. Kishan @ Ramadhar), under Section 363, 366 I.P.C., Police Station Bichawa, District Mainpuri, by which the custody application has been disposed of against the revisionist.

¶7

Yesterday, the parties had appeared before this Court wherein the daughter of the opposite party no. 2 (Ragini) had expressed her unequivocal desire to go back to her parental home. Admittedly, there has been no marriage between the parties.

¶8

Considering the above, no interference is warranted with the order impugned in the present revision in view of the stand taken by the victim.

¶9

Shri Anurag Shukla has appeared on behalf of opposite party nos. 2 and 3 and filed personal affidavit of opposite party no. 2. Paragraph no. 6 of the affidavit reads as under:

¶10

"6. That the deponent is a poor man does not want to indulgement in any litigation with the revisionist so that he undertakes before this Hon'ble Court that he will not continue litigation with the accused person revisionist namely Kishan @ Ramadhar."

¶11

It is further been stated by learned counsel for the parties that at present police investigation is still pending.

¶12

In view of the above, it is provided that subject to the opposite party no. 2 making his statement before the police during such investigation along with certified copy of this order, the prosecution itself may be withdrawn at this stage itself, if there is no other legal impediment.

¶13

With the aforesaid observations, the revision stands disposed of.

¶14

Order Date :- 18.7.2018 Prakhar

Kishan @ Ramadhar v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kishan @ Ramadhar v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mohd. Hasim Vs State of U.P. and Another

Asgan and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Chandra Bhan Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another

Daya Shankar Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Arun Kumar Gupta Vs State of U.P. and another

Sudhir Singh Chhonkar @ Sudhir and 6 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another