The High Court dismissed a criminal revision as infructuous because an intervening order declared the revisionist as a juvenile, rendering the challenge to the medical board direction moot.
Revision dismissed as infructuous.
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. - 89
Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 922 of 2016
Revisionist :- Mahboob Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Revisionist :- Satyendra Narayan Singh,Shiv Prakash,Shiv Prakash Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Pachori,J.
Even in revised call none has appeared for the revisionist. However, Sri Vijay Kumar Pandey, learned brief holder for the State is present.
The present criminal revision has been preferred to set aside the order dated 15.03.2016 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Hapur by which the revisionist was directed for ossification test report before medical board.
Learned brief holder for the State submits that this revision has become infructuous after passing the order dated 06.02.2023 by which the Special Judge (POCSO Act) declared the revisionist as juvenile.
Accordingly, the revisionist is dismissed as having become infructuous.
Order Date :- 27.4.2023 MAA/-
Digitally signed by :- MOHAMMAD AZAD ANSARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Sanjay Kumar Pachori
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
