In this criminal revision regarding a rejected discharge, the Single Judge found no case for interference but allowed bail if surrendered within 30 days.
Petition for bail refused; directed that bail be considered upon surrender within 30 days with no coercive action.
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. - 51
Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION DEFECTIVE No. - 644 of 2019
Revisionist :- Neeraj Kumar Saini And Anr. Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Anr. Counsel for Revisionist :- Sanjeev Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Vipin Sinha,J.
Cause shown in filing the revision is sufficient.
Delay in filing the revision is hereby condoned.
Accordingly, delay condonation appilcatin is allowed.
Office is directed to allot the regular number.
Heard learned counsel for the revisionists and Sri B.K. Pandey learned AGA appearing for the State.
The present criminal revision has been filed by the revisionists with the prayer to allow the revision and to set aside the impugned judgment and orders dated 15.03.2019 passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ist, Gorakhpur in compliant case no. 1848 of 2007 (Angad Prasad Vs. Neeraj Kumar Saini and Others).
The contention of learned counsel for the revisionists is that the present revision has been filed against the impunged order dated 15.03.2019 by means of which discharge has been rejected. There is no illegality or perversity have been pointed out, no case for grant of indulgence has been made out.
Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, after perusing the entire record and having considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties, I am of the view that no case is made out to interfere with the impugned order. The impugned order does not suffer from any infirmity or illegality. The Magistrate dealing with complaint at this stage has to see only prima-facie case and it cannot be said that no prima-facie case is made out against the revisionists. Further, the plea raised before this Court would require leading of evidence, which can be raised before the court concerned at the appropriate Stage. Hence, the prayer made in the present revision is refused.
At this stage, learned counsel for the revisionists prays that a direction may be issued to the court below for expeditious disposal of the bail application of the revisionists.
Hence, it is directed that in case the revisionists surrenders before the court below and apply for bail within 30 days from today the same shall be considered and decided in view of the settled law. For a period of 30 days from today, no coercive action shall be taken/given effect to against the revisionists. It is made clear that no further time will be allowed to the revisionists for surrender before the court concerned.
With the above observations, the revision stands disposed of.
Order Date :- 19.8.2019 Vikram
Neeraj Kumar Saini And Anr.
State Of U.P. And Anr.
Vipin Sinha
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
