Allahabad High Court
Guddu @ Karunasagar vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. ... on 9 May, 2022
Bench: Brij Raj Singh
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Court No. - 16
Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 425 of 2022
Revisionist :- Guddu @ Karunasagar
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home And 2 Others
Counsel for Revisionist :- Ramakar Shukla,Subodh Kumar Pandey
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Brij Raj Singh,J.
Heard Sri Ramakar Shukla, counsel for the revisionist and the learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
The present revision has been preferred with a prayer to allow the instant criminal revision setting aside the judgment and order dated 10.02.2021, passed by the IInd Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge, SC/ST (P.A.) Act, Lakhimpur Kheri, in Criminal Appeal No. 20 of 2015 (Guddu @ Karunasagar Vs. Smt. Reeta Devi & Others), Police Station Nighasan, District Lakhimpur Kheri with a further prayer to direct the appellate court to decide the appeal filed by the appellant under Section 29 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 against the judgment and order dated 14.04.2015, under Section 12 of the said Act.
The Case No. 4260 of 2013 filed under the provisions of Domestic Violence Act, 2005 was decided in favour of the opposite party Nos. 2 and 3. Against the said order, an appeal was preferred by the revisionist which was admitted on 14.05.2015 by the District and Sessions Judge, Lakhimpur Kheri. The case could not be decided for long time because the revisionist could not appear before the court, however, on 10.02.2021, the case was dismissed for want of prosecution.
Counsel for the revisionist has relied upon a judgment rendered by Hon'ble Supreme Court in Kishan Singh Vs. State of U.P. [AIROnline 1992 SC 207], to submit that in the aforesaid judgment, it has been observed that appeal should not be dismissed for default of the counsel and the Supreme Court restored the appeal and remitted it to the High Court to hear it on merits.
In the present case also the appeal has not been decided on merits, rather it has been dismissed for want of prosecution.
In view of the aforesaid factual legal aspect, It set aside the order dated 10.02.2021 and restore the appeal to its original number and remit the matter to the court below with observation that the same will be decided on merits within a period of two months from today.
It is made clear that no unnecessary adjournment will be granted to the revisionist/appellant, before the court below and if the counsel for the revisionist/appellant seeks unnecessary adjournment before the court below, the appeal will be decided in the absence of the counsel of the revisionist.
The revision stands disposed of accordingly.
Order Date :- 9.5.2022
Arun K. Singh
