The High Court dismissed the criminal revision petition as infructuous on the submission that the trial had already concluded, despite the filing being 215 days delayed. No substantive hearing on the merits of the bail dispute was conducted.
Prayer for hearing of the revision is allowed; criminal revision is 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.
Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:153595
Court No. - 64
Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION DEFECTIVE No. - 434 of 2024 Revisionist :- X- Juvenile Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Revisionist :- Piyush Tripathi,Sheetanshu Dwivedi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.
(Samit Gopal, J.)
Order Date :- 20.9.2024/Gaurav Kuls
Digitally signed by :- GAURAV KULSHRESTHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the criminal revision brought by the revisionist can be dismissed as infructuous.
Whether delay of 215 days in filing the revision warrants dismissal despite condonation application.
X-Juvenile
State of U.P.
Another
Samit Gopal
As recorded by the court registry
2 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
