Smt. Sanjula Tyagi vs State Of U.P. And Another
2022 Latest Caselaw 3133 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 93
 

 
Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION DEFECTIVE No. - 537 of 2016
 
Revisionist :- Smt. Sanjula Tyagi
 
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
 
Counsel for Revisionist :- Rajnish Dubey
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Santosh Kumar,Sunil Vashisth
 

 
Hon'ble Shamim Ahmed,J.

(Criminal Misc. Delay Condonation Application No. 276639 of 2016)

List has been revised.

None has appeared on behalf of the revisionist-applicant.

Heard learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

I have perused the affidavit filed in support of application for condonation of delay, the reason seems to be sufficient and convenient.

Learned A.G.A. has no objection to the prayer made by learned counsel for the revisionist/applicant.

The application is allowed. Delay in filing the revision is condoned.

Office is directed to allot the regular number to this revision.

Order on memo of revision

List has been revised.

None has appeared on behalf of the revisionist.

Heard learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

This revision has been filed against the judgment and order dated 31.05.2016 passed by Additional Session Judge, Court No.10 Meerut in S.T. No. 56 of 2015 Case Crime No. 106/2013: State Vs. Navin Tyagi and other, under Section 376, 511 I.P.C., Police Station Mahila Thana, District Meerut, pending before the Additional Session Judge, Court No.10, Meerut.

Learned A.G.A. submits and there appears no illegality or infirmity in the impugned judgment and order passed by the court below, therefore, the present revision may be dismissed.

I have gone through the judgment and order passed by the court below and also perused the record. I have also considered the arguments advanced by the learned A.G.A.. Further no one appeared on behalf of revisionist to assist the Court pointing out any illegality or infirmity in the judgment and order passed by the court below.

In view of the above, after having gone through the judgment and order under challenge, this Court comes to the conclusion that the same need no interference as there is no illegality or infirmity in the judgment and order under challenge, therefore, the present revision is liable to be dismissed.

Accordingly, the present revision is dismissed.

Let a copy of this order be sent to the concerned District and Sessions Judge for its onwards transmission to the concerned Magistrate for compliance who will proceed further in the matter.

The file is consigned to record.

Let the lower Court record, if any, be returned back to the concerned Court.

Order Date :- 17.5.2022

Arvind