A criminal revision was decided as the parties had amicably settled their dispute and a compromise affidavit was filed. The court directed the decision based on the compromise.
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. - 17
Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 833 of 2003
Revisionist :- Greesh Chandra Srivastava And Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Revisionist :- R.C. Pal Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt.Advocate,Awadhesh Kumar Yadav,Sanjiv Ratan
Hon'ble Suresh Kumar Gupta,J.
This revision has been filed against the judgment and order dated 18.12.2002 passed by Special/ Additional Session Judge, Siddharath Nagar in criminal revision no. 217 of 2001 arises out from dismissal of complaint case no. 2814 of 2001.
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
Learned counsel for both the side have submitted that the parties have amicably settled their disputes as a compromise has been arrived between the parties. Compromise affidavit has been filed.
There is no illegality in summoning order but the offence is compoundable, therefore, this revision and the cases related to this revision is directed to be decided in terms of compromise.
The revision is, accordingly, disposed of with the aforesaid observations/directions.
Order Date :- 20.2.2019
A. Pt. Singh
Greesh Chandra Srivastava
State Of U.P.
Suresh Kumar Gupta
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
