Dismissed¶17

Ibrahim v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC6 Nov 2025CRLR/6730/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Allahabad High Court criminal revision dismissed; challenge to Sessions Judge, Bijnor order in Session Trial No. 1579 of 2025 (case crime no. 279 of 2024, P.S. Noorpur); offences under B.N.S. Sections 109(1), 115(2), 118(1), 352, 351(3) r/w 3(5); incised weapon; skull injury 5cm x 5 cm bone deep; head vital part; contention that injuries simple rejected; charge sheet and framing of charges upheld; no illegality or irregularity; Ibrahim v. State of U.P.; decided November 6, 2025.

What did the court decide?

It is undisputed that there are several injured persons; the injuries are on the skull and incised 5cm x 5 cm bone deep, with specific allegation of use of an incised weapon; the head is a vital part and any injury on it could be fatal at any stage. ¶16

Ibrahim vs State of U.P. and Another — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

¶2

CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 6730 of 2025

Ibrahim

.....Revisionist(s)

Versus

State of U.P. and Another

¶7

.....Opposite Party(s)

¶8

Counsel for Revisionist(s) : Sanjay	Kumar Sharma
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

¶9

Court No. - 91

¶10

HON'BLE ABDUL SHAHID, J.

¶11

Heard learned counsel for the revisionist and the learned A.G.A. for the State. Perused the impugned order.

¶12

The instant revision has been preferred against the impugned order dated 28.7.2025 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Bijnor, in Session Trial No. 1579 of 2025, arising out of case crime no. 279 of 2024, under Sections 109(1), 115(2), 118(1), 352, 351(3) read with Section 3(5) of B.N.S., Police Station Noorpur, District Bijnor.

¶13

There are specific allegation of the use of incised weapon. There are injuries on the head.

¶14

Learned counsel for the revisionist has submitted that said injuries are simple.

¶15

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the revision.

¶16

It is undisputed that there are several injured persons. The injuries are on the skull and incised 5cm x 5 cm bone deep. There is use of incised weapon. Head is a vital part. Any injury on the head could be fatal at any stage. The charge sheet has been filed after completion of the investigation. Thereafter the charges have been framed by the trial court against the revisionist.

¶17

In view of the above, neither there is any illegality nor any irregularity in the impugned order and the revision is liable to be dismissed. It is accordingly dismissed.

¶18

November 6, 2025

¶19

M. Tarik

¶20

(Abdul Shahid,J.)

¶21

Digitally signed by :- MOHD TARIK High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Ibrahim v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ibrahim v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Tej Singh and Another vs State of U.P. and Another

Kamlesh vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

Shishupal vs State of U.P. through Principal Secretary Home Government of U.P. at Lucknow and Another

Rajkumar vs State of U.P. and 6 Others

Sangam Lal Aarak vs State of U.P. and Another

Jitendra Alias Shankar vs State of U.P. and Another