ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
SMT. LATA RANI – Appellant
Versus
State – Respondent
CRLR/2384/2022
CRIMINAL REVISION - MAINTAINABILITY - SECTION 151 CPC - NOT APPLICABLE IN CRIMINAL MATTERS
Fact of the Case:
The revisionist filed an application under Section 151 CPC to recall an order dismissing her application under Section 340 CrPC. The revisionist's application under Section 340 CrPC was dismissed due to her continuous absence since 2012.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that Section 151 CPC is not applicable in criminal matters and that the revisionist had a remedy of filing an appeal under Section 341 CrPC against the dismissal of her application under Section 340 CrPC.
Issues: Whether Section 151 CPC is applicable in criminal matters.
Ratio Decidendi: Section 151 CPC is not applicable in criminal matters. The revisionist had a remedy of filing an appeal under Section 341 CrPC against the dismissal of her application under Section 340 CrPC.
Final Decision: The criminal revision was dismissed as not maintainable.
Court No. - 88
Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 2384 of 2022
Revisionist :- Smt. Lata Rani
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Revisionist :- Parvesh Kumar Pandey,Sarvesh Kumar Pandey
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Raj Beer Singh,J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the revisionist, learned AGA for
the State and perused the record.
2. This criminal revision has been preferred against the
judgement and order dated 08.04.2022, passed by the
Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Court No.2,
Ghaziabad in misc. case no. 152 of 2015, Lata Rani v. Rakesh
Kumar, whereby the application under Section 151 of the Code
of Civil Procedure (hereinafter referred to as 'CPC') filed by the
revisionist Lata Rani to recall the order dated 21.09.2015
passed in original suit no. 63 of 2009 and to restore the said
case, has been rejected.
3. It appears from record that the revisionist has filed an
application under Section 340 Cr.P.C. read with Sections
193/420/467/468/471 IPC, in proceeding pending between the
parties. As no one was appearing to press the said application
under Section 340 Cr.P.C. since long, thus, the said application
was dismissed by the court below vide order dated 21.09.2015.
The revisionist has filed an application under Section 151 CPC
to recall the said order dated 21.09.2015, which has been
rejected vide impugned order dated 08.04.2022.
4. It is apparent from record that the said application under
Section 340 Cr.P.C. was dismissed by the court below by
observing that the complainant/revisionist was continuously
absent since 04.05.2012. Further, the application for restoration
of the said case was filed under Section 151 CPC, which is not
applicable in criminal matters. It may also be stated that the
provisions of Section 341 Cr.P.C. provide that any person on
whose application the Court has refused to make a complaint
under sub-sections (1) or (2) of Section 340 Cr.P.C., may appeal
to the court to which such former Court is subordinate. Thus,
the revisionist has remedy of filing an appeal under Section 341
Cr.P.C. against the order dated 21.09.2015, by which her
application under Section 340 Cr.P.C. was dismissed.
5. In view of the aforesaid, it is apparent that the instant
criminal revision is not maintainable and accordingly, the same
is dismissed as not maintainable.
Order Date :- 11.1.2023
A.Kr./Anand
Digitally signed by :-
ANAND VERMA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.