Disposed

Radha Krishna Dixit v. State of Up and Another

Allahabad HC11 Nov 2024A227/4627/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This is a writ petition under Article 227 challenging a revisional court order that set aside an order of the Sub Divisional Magistrate under Sections 145 and 146 Cr.P.C. and remanded the matter for rehearing. The Court directed the Sub Divisional Magistrate to decide the remanded matter and expedite it within two months.

What did the court decide?

Directing the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Bidhuna, to decide the remanded matter and expedite it within two months from the date of production of certified copy of this order without granting any unnec

Radha Krishna Dixit vs State of Up and Another — Landlord and Tenant | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:176266

¶2

Court No. - 85

¶3

Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 4627 of 2024

¶4

Petitioner :- Radha Krishna Dixit Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Petitioner :- Shiv Sagar Singh Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Radhey Shyam Yadav

¶5

Hon'ble Saurabh Srivastava,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶7

Present petition has been filed with the following prayer:-

¶8

"(i) issue a suitable order or direction setting aside the impugned order dated 20.01.2024 passed by Additional Session Judge Court, No. 1, District Auraiya in Criminal Revision No. 69 of 2023 - Radha Raman vs. Ram Krishna Dixit and another (Annexure no. 1 to the petition);"

¶9

Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that the instant petition has been preferred against the order dated 20.01.2024 whereby the order passed by Sub Divisional Magistrate, Bidhuna in Case No. 3272 of 2016 under Sections 145 and 146 Cr.P.C. dated 28.03.2023 has been illegally set aside and the matter was unnecessarily remanded back to the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Bidhuna for taking necessary action after rehearing the matter.

¶10

Learned counsel for the petitioner challenged the impugned order on the ground that the revisional court has exceeded its jurisdiction in deciding revision that the revisional power can be exercised in a limited scope until and unless findings is perverse and against the record then the revisional court can exercise its jurisdiction.

¶11

Learned counsel for the respondents vehemently opposed the prayer sought through the instant petition.

¶12

Be that as it may, without interfering into the merits of the matter and if there is no other legal impediment available, Sub Divisional Magistrate, Bidhuna is hereby directed to decide the matter which has already been remanded through order dated 20.1.2024 and expedite it within two months from the date of production of certified copy of this order without granting any unnecessary adjournment to either of the parties. All the parties are

¶13

directed to render their entire cooperation for achieving the order and direction as made above.

¶14

The instant petition stands disposed of accordingly.

¶15

Order Date :- 11.11.2024 Shaswat

¶16

Digitally signed by :- SHASWAT SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Radha Krishna Dixit v. State of Up and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Radha Krishna Dixit v. State of Up and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Arif and Another vs State of U.P. and Another

Abhinesh Pratap Singh and Another vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Sonu vs State of U.P. and Another

Ashwani vs State of Up and Another

Yameen vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Sanjay Rastogi and Another vs State of U.P. and Another