Dismissed

Pauhari and Others v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC24 Mar 2022CRLR/1305/2001

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this criminal revision filed in 2001, the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, No. 93 Bench, dismissed the petition against a conviction order. The court noted the absence of the revisionist and a lack of arguments highlighting any illegality, concluding that no interference was required.

What did the court decide?

Revision dismissed; order to send copy to District and Sessions Judge for onward transmission.

Pauhari and Others Vs State of U.P. — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 93

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 1305 of 2001

¶3

Revisionist :- Pauhari And Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Revisionist :- Bishram Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt. Advocate

¶4

Hon'ble Shamim Ahmed,J.

¶5

List has been revised.

¶6

None has appeared on behalf of the revisionist(s) to press this revision.

¶7

Sri Abhishek Shukla, learned A.G.A.-I for the State is present.

¶8

This revision has been filed against the order of conviction.

¶9

Learned AGA submits that the present revision is of the year 2001 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.

¶10

I have gone through the judgment and order(s) passed by the court(s) below and have also considered the arguments advanced by the learned AGA. Further no one appeared on behalf of revisionist to assist the Court pointing out any illegality or infirmity in the judgment and order(s) passed by the court(s) below.

¶11

In view of the above, after having gone through 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 AGA 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.

¶12

Accordingly, the present revision is dismissed.

¶13

Let a copy of this order be sent to the concerned District and Sessions Judge for its onward transmission to the concerned Magistrate for compliance who will proceed further in the matter.

¶14

Let the lower court record, if any, be returned back to the court concerned.

¶15

The file is consigned to record.

¶16

Order Date :- 24.3.2022 SP

¶17

Digitally signed by SALIM PRAVEJ Date: 2022.03.29 16:35:37 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Pauhari and Others v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pauhari and Others v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Megh Nath Vs State of U.P. and Others

Satnam Singh Alias Satta Vs State of U.P. and Others

Khushi Ram Upadhyay Vs State of U.P. and Others

Sunder Pal Sharma Vs State of U.P. and Others

Jai Singh and Others Vs State of U.P.

Kunwar Pal and Others Vs the State of U.P.