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

ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
SATYENDRA YADAV – Appellant
Versus
State of U.P. AND ANOTHER – Respondent


Advocates:
['RADHEY SHYAM SHUKLA', '', 'VIPUL SHUKLA', 'G A', '', 'MANOJ KUMAR GUPTA']

Court No. - 87

Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 2776 of 2022

Revisionist :- Satyendra Yadav

Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another

Counsel for Revisionist :- Radhey Shyam Shukla,Vipul Shukla

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Manoj Kumar Gupta

Hon'ble Dr. Gautam Chowdhary,J.

Heard learned counsel for the revisionist, Sri Manoj Kumar Gupta, learned

counsel for O.P. No. 2, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the

record.

This revisionist under section 397/401 Cr.P.C. has been filed against the

impugned order dated 27.5.2022 passed by learned Addl. Sessions Judge,

Court No . 42, Shahjahanpur in S.T. No. 616 of 2018 (State Vs. Sanu

Gupta and others), in Case Crime No. 1091 of 2016, under section 307/34

IPC, P.S.Khutar, District Shahjahanpur.

On perusal of the record, the Court finds that there is no legal infirmity in

the order impugned, which may call for any interference by this Court in

exercise of powers conferred under revisional jurisdiction, therefore, the

prayer to quash the impugned order and the consequential proceeding is

rejected.

At this stage, the learned counsel for the revisionist submits that the

revisionist has so far not been arrested in the above case and

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