X Juvenile v. State of U.P. and 3 Others
Case brief
What is this about?
Criminal revision adjourned. Notice served on opposite party no.2 but none appeared; State counsel sought three weeks for instructions and revisionist counsel sought an adjournment; both prayers allowed.
What the court decided
A compact analysis
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. - 64
Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 3222 of 2024
Revisionist :- X Juvenile Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Revisionist :- Mahesh Kumar,Ravi Shankar Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.
- Sri Mahesh Kumar, learned counsel for the revisionist and Sri Birendra Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the State are present.
- Notice was issued to the opposite party no.2 vide order dated 12.08.2024. As per office report dated 04.09.2024 notice has been served on the opposite party no.2. Despite service of notice on the opposite party no.2 no one appears on his behalf.
- Learned counsel for the State informs the Court that he has not received instructions in the matter and prays for three weeks time for the same.
- Learned counsel for the revisionist prays for an adjournment in the matter. Both the prayers are allowed.
- Let the matter be listed on 13.11.2024.
Order Date :- 4.10.2024 M. ARIF
Parties & counsel
- respondent
State Of U.P.
Coram
Samit Gopal
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- Allahabad HC
- Decided on
- · August
- Registered
- Case no.
- CRLR/3222/2024
All orders in this case
4 orders share this CNR
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court