Dismissed¶12

Har Narain and Another v. Padam Singh @ Punni and 2 Others

Allahabad HC22 Feb 2022CRLR/321/1991

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Allahabad High Court criminal revision dismissed; challenge to Magistrate's order dated 20.02.1991 under Section 145 Cr.P.C. dropping proceedings and releasing property to opposite parties; no appearance by revisionist; Additional Advocate General for the State urged dismissal for loss of interest due to efflux of time; no illegality or infirmity found; copy of order sent to District and Sessions Judge for transmission to Magistrate for compliance; Coram: Shamim Ahmed, J.; Order Date 22.2.2022.

What did the court decide?

The judgment and order under challenge suffers from no illegality or infirmity and needs no interference by this Court. ¶11

Har Narain and Another Vs Padam Singh @ Punni and 2 Others — Allahabad HC (2022) — LawSathi Research

¶1

Court No. - 93

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 321 of 1991

¶3

Revisionist :- Har Narain And Another Opposite Party :- Padam Singh @ Punni And 2 Others Counsel for Revisionist :- V K Chaturvedi Counsel for Opposite Party :- Tej Pal

¶4

Hon'ble Shamim Ahmed,J.

¶5

List has been revised.

¶6

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

¶7

Sri Vinod Kant, learned Additional Advocate General assisted by Sri Abhishek Shukla, learned A.G.A.-I for the State is present.

¶8

This revision has been filed against the judgment and order dated 20.02.1991 in Case No. 9 of 1990, Har Narain and others Vs. Padam Singh and others, under Section 145 Cr.P.C., by which he has dropped the proceedings under Section 145 Cr.P.C. and ordered that the property be released in favour of the opposite parties.

¶9

Shri Vinod Kant submits that the present revision is of the year, 1991 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.

¶10

I have gone through the judgment and order passed by the court below and 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 courts below.

¶11

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.

¶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 onwards transmission to the concerned Magistrate for compliance who will proceed further in the matter.

¶14

The file is consigned to record.

¶15

Order Date :- 22.2.2022

¶16

Arvind

¶17

Digitally signed by ARVIND KUMAR SRIVASTAVA Date: 2022.02.23 17:36:28 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Har Narain and Another v. Padam Singh @ Punni and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Har Narain and Another v. Padam Singh @ Punni and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sachin @ Sachin Bhartiya Vs State of U.P.and Another

Rohit Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another

Udit Tyagi(Minor) Vs State of U.P. and Another

Smt. Sonia Chopra Vs Surendra Kumar Chopra

Raghubeer Vs State

Ramesh Singh Vs State of U.P. and Others