Pankaj Vaisay Alias Dhirendra Singh vs State Of U.P. And Another
2024 Latest Caselaw 21689 ALL

Allahabad High Court

Pankaj Vaisay Alias Dhirendra Singh vs State Of U.P. And Another on 2 July, 2024

Author: Gautam Chowdhary

Bench: Gautam Chowdhary

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 


?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:107097
 
Court No. - 43
 

 
Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 3182 of 2024
 

 
Revisionist :- Pankaj Vaisay Alias Dhirendra Singh
 
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
 
Counsel for Revisionist :- Diwanshu Tiwari
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
 

 
Hon'ble Dr. Gautam Chowdhary,J.
 

1. Heard learned counsel for the revisionist, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

2. The instant criminal revision has been preferred for setting aside the order dated 10.05.2024 passed by learned Special Judge (Electricity Act)/ Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 3, Kannauj in S.S.T. No. 525 of 2020 (State Vs. Pankaj Vaisya), arising out of Case Crime No. 51 of 2020, under Section 135 of Electricity Act, Police Station Saurikh, District Kannauj, whereby discharge application moved on behalf of revisionist has been rejected.

3. Learned counsel for the revisionist submits that the learned Sessions Judge without applying judicial mind and without appreciating the material evidence available on record dismissed the discharge application moved on behalf of revisionists vide impugned order.

4. On the other hand, learned A.G.A. submits that there is no illegality or perversity in the impugned order, which may call for any interference by this Court, thus the present revision is liable to be dismissed.

5. Having heard rival submissions as advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and after perusal of the entire material available on record including the impugned judgment and order dated 10.05.2024, this Court finds that the court concerned has passed a reasoned and speaking order after considering the entire material evidence available before it. Thus, there is no illegality, perversity or impropriety in the order impugned and the same has rightly been passed. Moreover, the revisionist has failed to show any illegality or perversity in the order impugned, as such, no case is made out for interference. The present revision lacks merit and is liable to be dismissed.

6. Dismissed accordingly.

Order Date :- 2.7.2024

Mustaqeem.