Disposed

Rizwan Ullah I and Another v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC8 Mar 2019A227/1391/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This petition under Article 227 challenges orders withdrawing proceedings and dismissing a criminal revision without prior notice. The court directed the Additional Sessions Judge to decide the petitioners' application to recall the order within two weeks via a reasoned order.

What did the court decide?

Directing the Additional Sessions Judge to decide the application dated 20.8.2018 by speaking and reasoned order within two weeks.

Rizwan Ullah I and Another Vs State of U.P. and… — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 70

¶2

Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 1391 of 2019

¶3

Petitioner :- Rizwan Ullah I And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- A.P.Singh Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Singh,J.

¶5

Heard Mr. Sangam Lal Kesarwani asisted by Mr. A.P. Singh, learned counsel for the petitioners and leaned Additional Government Advocate and perused the record with the assistance of learned counsel for the parties.

¶6

This petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been preferred by the petitioners against the impugned order dated 24.11.2017 passed by Sub Divisional Magistrate, Madhuban, Mau in Case No. 30 of 2017 (Rizwanullah and others vs. Azim @ J.P. and others) under Section 145 Cr.P.C, whereby the proceedings under Section 146 (1) Cr.P.C. has been withdrawn by the Sub Divisional Magistrate as well as impugned order dated 24.7.2018 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, court No. 2, Mau in Criminal Revision No. 14 of 2018, whereby revision preferred by the petitioners against the order dated 14.11.2018 has been dismissed.

¶7

Assailing the aforesaid orders, it is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that aggrieved by the order dated 24.11.2017 passed by Sub Divisional Magistrate, the petitioners preferred Criminal Revision No. 14 of 2018 before the Additional Sessions Judge court No. 2, Mau, wherein on 12.07.2018, the revisional court passed an order fixing further date, i.e. 21.08.2018 for final hearing of the matter, on account of the reason that the advocates were abstained from judicial work on 12.07.2018.

¶8

It is vehemently urged that by the order dated 12.7.2018, further date was fixed for final hearing on 21.8.2018, but the revisional court behind the back of the petitioners and without giving any prior notice to the revisionists/petitioners or their counsel, heard and decided the Criminal Revision

¶9

No. 14 of 2018 on 24.7.2018 preponing the dates from 21.8.2018 to 24.7.2018, whereby the revision preferred by the petitioners has been dismissed by order dated 24.7.2018. It is submitted that under the circumstances, the petitioners having no option left, has moved an application dated 20.8.2018 before the same court/Additional Sessions Judge court No. 2, Mau mentioning the aforesaid facts with a prayer to recall the order dated 24.7.2018 and to hear the Criminal Revision No. 14 of 2018 afresh after giving an opportunity of hearing to the parties concerned on merits. The said application dated 2.8.2018 of the petitioners has been registered as Misc. Case No. 32 of 218 appended as annexure-11 to the petition. It is submitted that till date no order has been passed by the court of Additional Sessions Judge court No. 2, Mau on the application dated 2.8.2018 of the petitioners and the same is still pending before him.

¶10

Per contra, learned Additional Government Advocate submitted that at the first instance argument advanced on behalf of the petitioners appears to be attractive, but the suitable reply in this regard can not be given at this stage, as the application dated 20.8.2018 is pending before the Additional Sessions Judge court No. 2, Mau. This Court also feels that it is very surprising that when in a proceedings of criminal revision No. 14 of 2018, on 12.7.2018 further date of hearing was fixed for 21.8.2018, then how the matter was heard and decided preponing the date from 21.8.2018 to 24.7.2018.

¶11

In view of above, this Court feels, it would be appropriate to issue suitable direction to the Revisional Court to decide the application dated 2.8.2018 of the petitioners by speaking and reasoned order within time bound period.

¶12

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as argument advanced on behalf of learned counsel for the petitioners as well as State, the Additional Sessions Judge Court No. 2, Mau is directed to decide the application dated 20.8.2018 (registered as Misc. Case No. 32 of 2018 Rizwanullah and others vs. State and others)

¶13

arising out of order dated 24.7.2018 passed in Criminal Revision No. 14 of 2018 by speaking and reasoned order within two weeks from the date of production of certified copy of order of this Court.

¶14

With the aforesaid directions, the present petition is disposed of.

¶15

Order Date :- 8.3.2019 Sumaira

Rizwan Ullah I and Another v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rizwan Ullah I and Another v. State of U.P. and 3 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

Yashveer and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Munna and 6 Others Vs State of Up and Another

Virnedra Vikram@Kunwar Virendra Vikram Vs State of Up and Another

Niyajuddeen Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Bhagelu Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Pyare Singh and 02 Others Vs State of Up and Another