Single judge dismissed a 1990 revision under Section 145/146 Cr.P.C. regarding a property dispute as infructuous due to a 28-year efflux of time, deeming the matter no longer emergent.
Revision dismissed on the ground of efflux of time rendering the matter infructuous.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 54
Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 80 of 1990
Revisionist :- Sandev Dubey & Others Opposite Party :- Ram Piyari And Others Counsel for Revisionist :- Anurag Pathak Counsel for Opposite Party :- Sarvesh,A.G.A.
Hon'ble Rahul Chaturvedi,J.
Case called out in the revised list.
None appears on behalf of the revisionist to press this revision.
Order sheet shows that on time and again the case may be adjourned by either by the counsel for the revisionist or by counsel for the opposite party.
On 18.05.2016, the Hon'ble Mohd. Tahir,J. as His Lordship then was, has clearly indicated in his order that in case the revisionist has not appeared on the next date fixed, the revision shall be decided finally after hearing the counsel for the State.
Under the circumstance, I have gone through the record of the present revision which is of the year 1990, the instant revision is filed challenging the order dated 20.10.1989 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Jalaun at Orai by which learned revision court h as allowed the revision and has passed the order dated 28.02.1989 and remanded the matter back. The matter pertains to Section 145(1) Cr.P.C. and Section 146(1) Cr.P.C., the proceedings of Chamber X Part (d) shows that when the dispute as to the immovable, keeping in view the emergency other is likely cause breach in the society, since the matter is of 1990, I do not think proper that matter is still so emergent which warrants the proceeding under Section 145(1) Cr.P.C. and Section 146(1) Cr.P.C., after lapse of 28 years.
Under the circumstances, by efflux of time the matter renders infructuous accordingly, the revision is dismissed.
Order Date :- 7.4.2018 Abhishek Sri.
1 issue framed by the court
Whether a dispute under Section 145 Cr.P.C. remains emergent after a lapse of 28 years.
2 provisions across 1 enactments
Sandev Dubey & Others
Ram Piyari And Others
Rahul Chaturvedi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
