Criminal Revision No. 1147 of 2002 was dismissed as the revisionist failed to appear after efflux of time, and the State AG found no illegality in the lower court's order.
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. - 93 Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 1147 of 2002 Revisionist :- Fulaina Gupta Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Revisionist :- Dharmendra Singhal Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt. Advocate,Yogendra Kumar Sonkar
Hon'ble Shamim Ahmed,J.
List has been revised.
None has appeared on behalf of the revisionist (s) to press this revision.
Heard Sri Vinod Kant, learned Additional Advocate General assisted by Sri Abhishek Shukla, learned A.G.A.-I for the State.
Learned Additional Advocate General submits that the present revision is of the year 2002 and it appears that due to efflux of time the revisionist and his counsel have lost interest to pursue this matter, and there appears no illegality or infirmity in the impugned judgment and order(s) passed by the court(s) below, therefore, the present revision may be dismissed.
I have gone through the judgment and order(s) passed by court (s) below and also perused the record. I have also considered the arguments advanced by the learned Additional Advocate General. Further no one appeared on behalf of revisionist to assist the Court pointing out any illegality or infirmity in both the judgment and order(s) passed by the court(s) below.
In view of the above, after having gone through both the judgment and order(s) under challenge, this Court comes to the conclusion that the same need no interference as there is no illegality or infirmity in the judgment and order(s) under challenge, and further there appears force in the argument of the learned Additional Advocate General that due to efflux of time the revisionist and his counsel have lost interest in pursuing the matter, therefore, the present revision is liable to be dismissed.
Accordingly, the present revision is dismissed.
Let a copy of this order be sent to the concerned District and Sessions Judge for its onwards transmission to the concerned Magistrate for compliance who will proceed further in the matter.
The file is consigned to record.
Let the lower Court record, if any, be returned back to the concerned Court.
Order Date :- 26.5.2022/Arvind
Digitally signed by ARVIND KUMAR SRIVASTAVA Date: 2022.05.27 15:12:31 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Fulaina Gupta
State of U.P.
Shamim Ahmed
Arvind Kumar Srivastava
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
