A criminal revision against a Family Court order decreeing a maintenance claim under Section 125 Cr.P.C. was dismissed due to non-appearance of the revisionist and lack of arguable concealability.
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. - 307 of 1998 Revisionist :- Bansraj Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Others Counsel for Revisionist :- G.N.Verma Counsel for Opposite Party :- A.G.A.,Anirudh Pratap Singh
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 Vinay Prakash Shahu, learned A.G.A. is present.
This revision has been filed against the judgment and order dated 2.2.1998 passed by Judge Family Court, Azamgarh decreeing the plaintiff's claim for maintenance under Section 125 Cr.P.C.
Sri Vinod Kant, learned Additional Advocate General submits that the present revision is of the year, 1998 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 passed by the court below, therefore, the present revision may be dismissed.
I have gone through the judgment and order passed 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 the judgment and order passed by the court below.
In view of the above, after having gone through the judgment and order 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 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 :- 7.3.2022 Arvind
Digitally signed by ARVIND KUMAR SRIVASTAVA Date: 2022.03.23 16:37:37 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Shamim Ahmed
Arvind Kumar Srivastava
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
