High Court of Judicature at Allahabad dismissed Criminal Revision No. 242 of 1995 filed by Gopi Nath against conviction for Sections 307 and 506 IPC due to lack of appearance by revisionist and alleged loss of interest due to efflux of time.
Revision dismissed; order transmitted to concerned judges for compliance.
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. - 242 of 1995 Revisionist :- Gopi Nath Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Revisionist :- S.D. Kautilya Counsel for Opposite Party :- A.G.A.
Hon'ble Shamim Ahmed,J.
List has been revised.
None has appeared on behalf of the revisionist to press this revision.
Sri Vinod Kant, learned Additional Advocate General assisted by Sri Suresh Bahadur Singh, learned A.G.A.-I for the State is present.
This revision has been filed against the judgment and order dated 06.02.1995 by Sessions Judge, Furrukhabad, passed in Criminal Appeal No. 7 of 1994 confirming the conviction and sentence dated 27.01.1994 awarded by Assistant Sessions Judge in S.T. 266 of 1992 (State Vs. Gopi Nath and other) to go four year rigorous imprisonment and Rs. 500/- fine under Section 307 I.P.C. and six months rigorous imprisonment and Rs. 300/fine under Section 506 I.P.C.
Shri Vinod Kant submits that the present revision is of the year, 1995 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 orders passed by the courts below, therefore, the present revision may be dismissed.
I have gone through the judgment and order passed by the appellate court as well as by the court 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 judgments and orders passed by the courts below.
In view of the above, after having gone through both the judgments and orders under challenge, this Court comes to the conclusion that the same need no interference as there is no illegality or infirmity in the judgments and orders 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 :- 24.2.2022
Arvind
Digitally signed by ARVIND KUMAR SRIVASTAVA Date: 2022.02.25 12:12:21 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Gopi Nath
State of U.P.
Shamim Ahmed
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
