X (Minor) vs State Of U.P. And 3 Others
2025 Latest Caselaw 2905 ALL

Allahabad High Court

X (Minor) vs State Of U.P. And 3 Others on 2 January, 2025

Author: Samit Gopal

Bench: Samit Gopal

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 


?Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:734
 
Court No. - 78
 

 
Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 1913 of 2023
 

 
Revisionist :- X (Minor)
 
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others
 
Counsel for Revisionist :- Juned Alam,Mohd Hamid
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Vimal Kumar Pandey
 

 
Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.
 

1. List revised. No one appears on behalf of the revisionist to press this revision despite the fact that there are two learned counsels on behalf of the revisionist. Sri Vimal Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the first informant/opposite party no.2 and Sri Bade Lal Bind, learned counsel for the State are present.

2. Present criminal revision has been preferred to set aside the judgment and order dated 13.3.2023 passed by Special Judge (POCSO Act)/Children Court, Court No. 1, Kushi Nagar at Padrauna in Crl. Appeal No.06 of 2023 (X minor) Vs. State of U.P. and another) and order dated 25.1.2023 passed by Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Kushi Nagar at Padrauna in Case Crime No.147, 148, 323, 307 IPC, P.S. Kotwali Hata, District Kushinagar whereby both the courts have rejected the bail of the revisionist.

3. Even previously on 3.10.2024, there was no representation on behalf of the revisionist in the revised list and in the interest of justice, as a last opportunity, the matter was adjourned and it was made clear that the matter will not be adjourned on the next date as a matter of right. The said order reads as under:-

"1. List revised.

2. No one appears on behalf of the revisionist to press this revision even in the revised list despite the fact that there are two learned counsels appearing in the matter. Sri Vimal Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 is also not present. Sri Triveni Saran Rai, learned counsel for the State is present.

3. As a last opportunity in the interest of justice, the matter is adjourned for today.

4. List on 22.11.2024.

5. It is made clear that the matter will not be adjourned on the next date as a matter of right."

4. Today again even in the revised list, there is no representation on behalf of the revisionist. The records have been perused with the assistance of learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and learned counsel for the State.

5. The matter relates to an offence serious in nature of which FIR was lodged under Section 147, 148, 323, 307 IPC. The accused-revisionist has been assigned the role of assault with the knife on injured Anoop Sahani who has received corresponding injury as per the medical examination report annexed as annexure no.2 to the affidavit in support of revision.

6. In view of the above, no ground exists to interfere in the matter. The same is dismissed even on the ground that there is no representation on behalf of the revisionist.

(Samit Gopal, J.)

Order Date :- 2.1.2025

Gaurav Kuls