In Criminal Revision No. 1324 of 2018, this court observed that the parties had compromised. Consequently, the court dismissed the revision petition as withdrawn.
Revision dismissed as withdrawn.
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. - 66
Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 1324 of 2018
Revisionist :- Shilpi Agrawal Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Revisionist :- Chandan Sharma Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Sarvesh Kumar Dubey
Hon'ble Rajul Bhargava,J.
Sri Chandan Sharma, learned counsel for the revisionist submits that as the parties have settled all their disputes and differences and arrived at compromise, they does not want to press this revision. Therefore, the same may be dismissed as withdrawn.
Sri Sarvesh Kumar Dubey, learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 is present and states that he has no objection if the petition is dismissed as withdrawn.
Accordingly, the revision is dismissed as withdrawn.
Order Date :- 11.12.2019 Meenu
Shilpi Agrawal
State of U.P.
Rajul Bhargava
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
