Dismissed

Kapil and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC14 Mar 2018CRLR/777/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This revision petition was dismissed. The High Court held that no illegality existed in the lower court orders summoning the revisionists under Cr.P.C. Section 319 and the subsequent orders. The court clarified that bail applications upon surrender would be considered expeditiously by the court below.

What did the court decide?

Impugned orders dated 4.9.2017 and 18.1.2018 were upheld. Surrender and bail applications to be considered by court below.

Kapil and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 52

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 777 of 2018

¶3

Revisionist :- Kapil And Another Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Revisionist :- S.P.S. Chauhan,Smt. Meenakshi Chauhan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Rajul Bhargava,J.

¶5

The revision has been filed by the revisionists with the prayer to quash the order dated 4.9.2017 passed by Addl. Session Judge, Court no. 7, Aligarh in Criminal Revision No. 68 of 2016 (Dharmpal vs. State of U.P. and others) and order dated 18.1.2018 passed by Judicial Magistrate, Khair, Aligarh in Crl Case no. 482 of 2010, u/s 323, 324, 354, 504 IPC, arising out of case crime no. 147 of 2009, P.S. Pisawa, District Aligarh.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the revisionists and the learned AGA appearing for the State.

¶7

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the revisionists that the revisionists were named in the F.I.R. but were not chargesheeted. After investigation during trial, other co-accused filed application for summoning them u/s 319 Cr.P.C., which was rejected by the concerned Magistrate vide order dated 4.11.2015 on the ground that independent witnesses Siraj Khan and Vedbeer have not supported the prosecution case. The said order was challenged by the opposite party no. 2 in the Revision; the Revisional court after taking into account that there was sufficient material/ evidence of other witnesses whose statements were recorded during trial, quashed the order dated 4.11.2015 and remanded back the matter for considering afresh in accordance with law. Thereafter the revisionists have been summoned by order dated 18.1.2018 by the Judicial Magistrate, Khair.

¶8

On the other hand, learned AGA has submitted that the impugned orders do not suffer from any illegality or infirmity warranting interference of this Court.

¶9

I have carefully perused the order passed by the Revisional court as well as order passed by Judicial Magistrate. I do not find any illegality in the aforesaid orders.

¶10

The instant revision is dismissed. However, if the revisionists surrender and apply for bail before the court below, the same shall be considered and decided expeditiously in accordance with law.

¶11

Order Date :- 14.3.2018 Dhirendra/

Kapil and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kapil 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

Shahid Ali @ Shola Jaunpuri Vs State of U.P.

Chand Babu and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Saddiq Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ashok Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

Nar Singh Gupta @ Nar Singh Prasad and Anr. Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Soni Mishra @ Sunil Mishra and Anr. Vs State of U.P. and Anr.