Dismissed
Prem Prakash v. S.P. Tyagi
Allahabad HCCRLR/1610/1991
Case brief
AI extract
What is this about?
In a criminal revision filed under Sections 401 and 397 Cr.P.C., the Single Bench found no manifest error or illegality to warrant interference and dismissed the petition.
What did the court decide?
Criminal revision dismissed; interim order vacated.
What the court decided
AI extract
¶1
Court No. - 34
¶2
Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 1610 of 1991
¶3
Revisionist :- Prem Prakash Opposite Party :- S.P. Tyagi Counsel for Revisionist :-
¶4
Counsel for Opposite Party :- A.G.A.
¶5
Hon'ble Sudhir Agarwal,J.
¶6
- Notice was issued to revisionist to engage another counsel vide Court's order dated 10.09.2018 and it was sent by registered post. Perused the office report dated 09.07.2019. Service is deemed sufficient. Called in revise. None appeared on behalf of revisionist.
¶7
- This criminal revision under Section 401 read with Section 397 Cr.P.C. has been filed aggrieved by judgment and order dated 31.10.1991 passed by Sri Pooran Singh, Special Judge, Moradabad in Criminal Revision No.411 of 1991, S.P.Tyagi and others vs. Prem Prakash and another, allowing the revision and setting aside order of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Moradabad dated 7.8.1991 framing charges against opposite parties in Criminal Case No.2271 of 1991.
¶8
- Having gone through the record, I do not find any manifest error or otherwise illegality, procedural or otherwise, so as to justify interference in criminal revision.
¶9
- Dismissed.
Issues for consideration
1 issue framed by the court
AI extract
Whether any manifest error or illegality justified interference in the criminal revision.
Coram
AI extract
Sudhir Agarwal
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- Allahabad HC
- Decided on
- · July
- Registered
- Case no.
- CRLR/1610/1991
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court