Tajammul And 2 Ors. vs State Of U.P.
2022 Latest Caselaw 10476 ALL

Citation : 2022 Latest Caselaw 10476 ALL
Judgement Date : 17 August, 2022

Allahabad High Court

Tajammul And 2 Ors. vs State Of U.P. on 17 August, 2022

Bench: Dinesh Kumar Singh




HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
 
 

?Court No. - 10
 

 
Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 319 of 2008
 

 
Revisionist :- Tajammul And 2 Ors.
 
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
 
Counsel for Revisionist :- Akhter Abbas
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt. Advocate
 

 
Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh,J.

1. This criminal revision, under Section 397/401 CrPC, has been filed for quashing of the judgment and order dated 19.03.2008 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No. 29, Barabanki in Criminal Appeal No.40 of 2003 filed by the revisionists and for quashing of the judgment & order dated 25.07.2003 passed by the learned Additional Civil Judge (J.D.)/Judicial Magistrate Court No. 26, Barabanki in Criminal Case No.429 of 2002, arising out of Crime No.031A of 1988, under Sections 323, 324 and 325 IPC lodged at Police Station Subeha, District Barabanki.

2. The learned Magistrate convicted and sentenced the revisionists under Sections 323/34, 324/34 and 325/34 IPC for maximum term of 2 years imprisonment with fine stipulation.

3. The learned appellate Court, while confirming the judgement and order passed by the learned trial Court, directed the revisionists to be released on probation for a period of two years, keeping peace and good behaviour in the society, on each of them filing a personal bond with one surety for Rs.5,000/-. The revisionists were also directed to deposit Rs.2,000/- each (total Rs.6,000/-) to be provided as recompense for the injuries of the victims and, on default to pay the amount of compensation, the sentence, as pronounced by the learned trial Court, shall be operational.

4. The incident is alleged to have taken place on 28.06.1988 at around 6 p.m.

5. After perusing the judgment and orders carefully passed by the learned Courts below, this Court does not find any error of law, fact or evidence, which requires any interference by this Court in exercise of revisional jurisdiction. Thus, the revision fails and is, accordingly, dismissed.

Order Date :- 17.8.2022

MVS/-