Disposed

Praveen Kumar v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC19 Sept 2022CRLR/2354/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The single-judge bench held that the impugned order of the lower court was contradictory as it set aside a decision while dismissing the revision at the admission stage. The court directed the lower court to decide the matter afresh by a reasoned order after hearing both parties, without examining merits.

What did the court decide?

Directed the lower court to decide the revision afresh by a reasoned order after hearing both parties.

Praveen Kumar Vs State of U.P. and Another — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 92

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 2354 of 2022

¶3

Revisionist :- Praveen Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Revisionist :- Sunil Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Sanjeev Kumar Pandey

¶4

Hon'ble Gajendra Kumar,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the revisionist and learned AGA for the State-respondents.

¶6

This revision has been filed by the revisionist with a prayer to set aside the impugned order dated 17.05.2022 passed by Session Judge, Baghpat in Criminal Revision No.80 of 2022 by which he was pleased to allow the revision filed by the opposite party no.2 against the interlocutory order dated 10.05.2022 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Baghpat rejecting the recall application seeking the recall of bailable warrant issued by the court against the opposite party no.2 in Criminal Case no. 279 of 2020.

¶7

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that this is the first criminal revision against the impugned order dated 17.05.2022 passed by Session Judge, Baghpat, in Criminal Revision No.80 of 2022 by which he was please to allow the revision filed by the opposite party no.2 against the interlocutory order dated 10.05.2022 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Baghpat rejecting the recall application seeking the recall of bailable warrant issued by the court against the opposite party no.2 in criminal case no.279 of 2020.

¶8

The learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer, but could not dispute the aforesaid facts.

¶9

Learned lower court while dismissing the merit of the revision has come to the conclusion that revision is not maintainable and Bailable Warrant should not have been issued.

¶10

Thus, at the stage of admission, revision is not maintainable but while passing the order, he set aside the impugned order dated 10.5.2022 and also dismissed the criminal revision at the admission stage which shows that the impugned order is contradictory in itself. In case, criminal revision is not maintainable then impugned order should not have been set aside, but learned lower court has committed apparent illegality in passing the impugned order, which is not sustainable in the

¶11

facts.

¶12

In the facts and circumstances of the case, this criminal revision stands disposed of with direction to the court below to decide the revision of the revisionist as fresh, after hearing both the parties, by a reasoned and speaking order as expeditiously as possible.

¶13

It is made clear that the court has not gone into the merits of the matter at this stage.

¶14

Order Date :- 19.9.2022 A.N. Mishra

¶15

Digitally signed by AMARNATH MISHRA Date: 2022.09.29 17:29:56 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Praveen Kumar v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Praveen Kumar v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sagar Nagar Vs State of U.P.

Usman @ Arman Vs State of U.P.

Lal Ji Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Mansoor Ali Vs State

Kuddoos Ahmad and Another Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Mahendra Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another