Criminal Revision dismissed for want of prosecution as the revisionist failed to engage counsel despite notices due to incorrect address.
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. - 28
Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 1058 of 2002
Revisionist :- Arun Kumar Dwivedi Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Revisionist :- Jagdish Singh Sengar Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt. Advocate
Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J.
This Criminal Revision was filed by Mr. Jagdish Singh Sengar, Advocate, who has since been expired. Thereafter, notices were issued to the revisionist to engage another counsel, but notice has not been served upon him on account of incorrect address. It is the revisionist, who has to do pairvi of the case. Since the revisionist is not interested in pursuing the case, this Court has no other option, but to dismiss the present criminal revision.
Accordingly, this criminal revision is dismissed for want of prosecution.
Order Date :- 3.7.2019 HSM
Arun Kumar Dwivedi
State Of U.P.
Rajeev Misra
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
