Allowed

Ashish Mishra v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lucknow and Another

Allahabad HC18 Jan 2024CRLR/47/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In Criminal Revision No. 47 of 2024, the Allahabad High Court admitted the revision challenging the summoning of Ashish Mishra under Section 319 Cr.P.C. The High Court granted an interim stay of the impugned order and further proceedings pending trial, directing the trial court to record witness statements.

What did the court decide?

Stayed the operation of the impugned order and further proceedings pending trial until the next date of listing; directed trial court to record witness statements.

Ashish Mishra vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy… — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Court No. - 29 Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 47 of 2024 Revisionist :- Ashish Mishra Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lucknow And Another Counsel for Revisionist :- Kailash Nath Mishra,Rahul Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶2

Hon'ble Mrs. Renu Agarwal,J.

¶3

The present Criminal Revision under Section 397/401 Cr.P.C has been preferred against the order dated 16.12.2023 passed by the learned I Additional Sessions Judge, Gonda in session Trial No. 900 of 2021 (State Vs. Deepak Pandey) arising out of Case Crime No. 142 of 2021 under Section 302 IPC Police Station Paraspur District Gonda whereby the application under Section 319 Cr.P.C moved by the respondent No. 2 has been allowed the the revisionist has been summoned for facing trial.

¶4

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the revisionist that the trial court has not considered the statement of witness recorded by court during trial. It is also submitted that simple death information was given by one Ramesh Mishra without any allegation on the date of occurrence i.e. on 22.06.2021, later on 25.06.2021 the FIR has been lodged by the brother of the deceased against the present revisionist as well as Deepak Mishra. During investigation no case was found against the present revisionist and charge sheet has been submitted against co-accused Deepak Mishra who is under trial. It is also submitted that the learned trial court without considering the facts of the case, the statement of witnesses and its satisfaction summoned the applicant under Section 319 Cr.P.C.

¶5

Matter needs consideration.

¶6

Admit.

¶7

Issue notice to the opposite party No.2. Returnable within three weeks. Steps be taken within three days.

¶8

List this matter after three weeks.

¶9

(C.M.Application No. 1 of 2024: Application for interim relief)

¶10

The present application has been moved with the prayer to stay the operation of impugned order dated 16.12.2023 and further proceedings of Sessions Trial No. 900 of 2021, Case Crime No. 142 of 2021 under Section 302 IPC, Police Station Paraspur District Gonda pending in the court of learned I Additional Sessions Judge, Gonda in respect of revisionist.

¶11

For the reasons apparent on record through the affidavit of the deponent, the operation of impugned order dated 16.12.2023 and further proceedings of Sessions Trial No. 900 of 2021, Case Crime No. 142 of 2021 under Section 302 IPC, Police Station Paraspur District Gonda pending in the court of learned I Additional Sessions Judge, Gonda shall remain stayed till the next date of listing, in respect of the present revisionist only.

¶12

The trial court concerned is directed to record the statement of witnesses against the remaining accused.

¶13

(Renu Agarwal,J.)

¶14

Order Date :- 18.1.2024 Nadeem

¶15

Digitally signed by :- NADEEM AHMAD High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Ashish Mishra v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lucknow and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ashish Mishra v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lucknow 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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Upendra Kumar Hoon vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Namami Gange Evam Gramin Jal Apoorti Vibhag and Another

Mahesh Kumar vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue, Lucknow and Others

Urmila Dubey vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Basic Education U.P. Lko. and 3 Others

Farhan vs State of U.P Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. /Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Abhishek Srivastava vs State of U.P Thru. Secy. Deptt. Basic Education Govt. Lko. and 3 Others

Madhuri Devi vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Basic Education Lko. and 3 Others