SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2000 Supreme(All) 214

S.K.AGARWAL
MALTI – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
A.P.SINGH, Braham Singh, H.C.Rastogi, RAM BABU SHARMA, Ran Vijay Singh, S.P.SINGH, Taj Pal

S. K. AGARWAL, J.

( 1 ) THIS revision arises against the judgment dated 17-5-1993 passed in Criminal Revision No. 341 of 1991 by IVth Additional Sessions Judge, Budaun allowing the revision and setting aside the order passed in Criminal Case No. 6 of 1991 under Section 125, Cr. P. C.

( 2 ) THE present revision is preferred against the aforesaid order setting aside the grant of maintenance allowance to the applicant. Before entering into the merits of the case this Court on 13-12-1999 had directed as under : "last opportunity is given to the parties to appear and argue the case failing which the case shall be decided on merit. "

( 3 ) LIST has been revised. No one has appeared even today on behalf of the applicant to press this revision. Shri Ran Vijay Singh, learned Counsel for the opposite party is present. The case was listed for delivery of judgment on 18-2-2000. On this day the counsel for the applicant appeared before the Court and desired to argue. He was heard. Before proceeding I wish to discuss the case relating to right to hearing by a party in a criminal revision.

( 4 ) CODE of Criminal Procedure contemplating such contingencies and situations enacted Section 403. It read












Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top