This criminal revision under Section 397/401 Cr.P.C. was called on by the High Court. The court perused the record as no one appeared to press the revision. Finding no manifest error or illegality, the court dismissed the revision and vacated any interim order.
Revision dismissed; interim order, if any, stands vacated.
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. - 34
Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 1824 of 2000
Revisionist :- Pyarey Lal Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Others Counsel for Revisionist :- K.S. Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt. Advocate
Hon'ble Sudhir Agarwal,J.
1 issue framed by the court
Whether interference in criminal revision is justified against the rejection of application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C.
2 provisions across 1 enactments
Pyarey Lal
State of U.P.
Sudhir Agarwal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
