Prem Shanker Shukla vs State Of U.P. & Another
2013 Latest Caselaw 881 ALL

Citation : 2013 Latest Caselaw 881 ALL
Judgement Date : 12 April, 2013

Allahabad High Court

Prem Shanker Shukla vs State Of U.P. & Another on 12 April, 2013

Bench: Jayashree Tiwari




HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 25
 

 
Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 773 of 2009
 

 
Petitioner :- Prem Shanker Shukla
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P. & Another
 
Petitioner Counsel :- Lalji Yadav,Rajesh Yadav
 
Respondent Counsel :- Govt. Advocate,R.J. Singh,Ram Janam Singh
 

 
Hon'ble Mrs. Jayashree Tiwari,J.

Case called out in the revised list.

Learned counsel for the applicant revisionist has sent illness slip today. The same be taken on record and made part of the record.

A perusal of the record shows that already on twelve occasions earlier, the case was passed over on the request of the learned counsel for the revisionist. Today the case is listed as peremptorily, and it was requested that learned counsel for the revisionist to argue the matter on the next date fixed. Despite this specific order, mention slip has been sent by the learned counsel for the revisionist without discussing any personal matter. As such, it is not liable to be accepted and it is rejected.

Perused the record.

The present criminal revision has been filed against the charges framed under section 308 I.P.C. by the learned trial court. A perusal of the record clearly shows that charges have already been framed on 20.02.2009. There is no averment that any application for discharge was ever given or any argument was raised at the time of the framing of the charge. The signatures were made under the protest but in the usual course. The revision against the charge have already been framed, it appears that the revision has become infructuous. It is accordingly dismissed as infructuous.

More so, under the scheme of the Cr.P.C., a charge can be alternative and at any stage of the trial either on the application of the charge or on his own motion, the applicant may have appropriate remedy at his hand. The revision, therefore, appears to have no force in itself and is liable to be dismissed as such.

The revision is accordingly dismissed.

Order Date :- 12.4.2013

Monika