Dismissed

Shamshad v. State

Allahabad HC24 Feb 2022CRLR/225/1994

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed a criminal revision filed under Section 51 of the Indian Forest Act challenging the rejection of a release application. The court held that there was no illegality in the impugned order and, due to the efflux of time and the revisionist's lack of interest in pursuing the matter following the non-appearance of counsel, the revision was liable to be dismissed.

What did the court decide?

The criminal revision is dismissed with no scope for interference.

Shamshad Vs State — Allahabad HC (2022) — LawSathi Research

¶1

Court No. - 93

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 225 of 1994

¶3

Revisionist :- Shamshad Opposite Party :- State Counsel for Revisionist :- Surendra Prasad Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- A.G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Shamim Ahmed,J.

¶5

List has been revised. No one has appeared on behalf of the revisionist. Shri Sanjay Kumar Singh, the learned A.G.A. for the State is present.

¶6

This revision has been filed challenging the order dated 25.01.1994 passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Maharajganj, in Range Case No. 40 of 1993-94, under Section 51 of Indian Forest Act, U.P. Transit of Timber and other Forest Produce Rules of Rule 26, whereby the court below has rejected the release application of the revisionist.

¶7

Shri Sanjay Kumar Singh submits that the present revision is of the year, 1994 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 order passed by the court below, therefore, the present revision may be dismissed.

¶8

I have gone through the impugned order passed by the court below and also perused the record. I have also considered the arguments advanced by the learned A.G.A. Further no one appeared on behalf of revisionist to assist the Court pointing out any illegality or infirmity in the impugned order passed by the court below.

¶9

In view of the above, after having gone through the order under challenge, this Court comes to conclusion that the same needs no interference as there is no illegality or infirmity in the order under challenge, and further there appears force in the argument of the learned A.G.A. 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.

¶10

Accordingly, the present revision is dismissed.

¶11

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

¶12

matter.

¶13

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

¶14

The file is consigned to record.

¶15

Order Date :- 24.2.2022 Mustaqeem.

¶16

Digitally signed by MOHD MUSTAQEEM KHAN Date: 2022.03.04 11:54:56 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Shamshad v. State

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shamshad v. State

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt. Sonia Chopra Vs Surendra Kumar Chopra

Raghubeer Vs State

Ramesh Singh Vs State of U.P. and Others

Bhudeo Singh Vs State of U.P.

Gopi Nath Vs State of U.P.

Ram Kishan Kasera Vs State and Another