Subhash Chandra Saxena v. State Of U.P. & Another

Court No. - 34

Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 900 of 1996

Revisionist :- Subhash Chandra Saxena Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. & Another Counsel for Revisionist :- A.K. Agnihotry Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt. Advocate

Hon'ble Brijesh Kumar Srivastava-II,J.

1.List has been revised.

2.None is present on behalf of revisionist, while learned Additional Government Advocate is present for the State.

3.In instant revision under challenge is order dated 03.06.1996 passed by Vth Additional District Judge, Etawah in Sessions Trial No. 38 of 1996 'State Vs. Mulayam Singh', under Section 302 IPC, police station Bharthana, Etawah by means of which revisionist had been summoned.

4.It appears that the Court below has passed the impugned order after going through the record in question, basing its finding on FIR itself.

5.Almost nineteen years have gone and otherwise also I do not find any illegality, irregularity, perversity and jurisdictional error in the impugned order. Moreover, none is present to press this revision.

6.The criminal revision is devoid of merit and is liable to be dismissed. It is dismissed accordingly.

7.Interim order, if any, stands vacated.

8.Let a copy of this order be transmitted to Court below concerned within a fortnight.

Order Date :- 25.8.2015 MVS Chauhan/-

Neutral Citation No. - 2015:AHC:122717