In a criminal revision under Section 466 LU Act regarding a conviction under Section 376 IPC, the Allahabad HC dismissed the petition. The revision was rejected for being defective due to non-compliance of Record Diligence rules, with opposing submission held irrelevant.
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.
Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:11178
Court No. - 27
Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION DEFECTIVE No. - 29 of 2024 Revisionist :- Raj Kumar Gautam
Opposite Party :- Smt. Kanti Devi Counsel for Revisionist :- Shailendra Kumar Dubey Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.
हकेरपु ्ቚररቔኋनर-पत कके सरर वदयके शपर-पत मम ऐसर ककोई करन नहीሻ वकयर गयर हह जिको ्ቚरम दृቖኌयर पपुनररी्ቌण ्ቚस्रपुर करनके मम हहए वविललंब कके धलए ककोई समपुवचर कररण ्ቚदवशቔኋर कर सकके।
(Subhash Vidyarthi,J.)
Order Date :- 7.2.2024/Ankit
Digitally signed by :- ANKIT SHARMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court's revision was filed defectively due to non-compliance with Record Diligence Certificate provisions.
Whether the High Court failed to consider opposing submission duly filed after record was called for.
Subhash Vidyarthi
As recorded by the court registry
2 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
