CourtKutchehry.com
High CourtsSingle Bench

Natthu Lal vs State Of U.P. And Another

Allahabad High Court · Decided on 2 January 2025 · Citation: (2025) 01 AHC CK 1654

HON’BLE JUDGES
Kshitij Shailendra, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Constitution of India, 1950 — Article 227 · Civil Procedure Code 1908 — Section 9, 96, Order 2 Rule 2, Order 7 Rule 10, Order 7 Rule 11, Order 7 Rule 11(d), Order 7 Rule 14, Order 7 Rule 14(3), Order 41 Rule 31 · Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code, 2006 — Section 4(12), 4(14), 144, 206 · Uttar Pradesh Zamindari Abolition & Land Reforms Act, 1950 — Section 143, 144
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Matters Under Article 227 No. 13197 Of 2024
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

10 paragraphs · 392 words

Saurabh Srivastava, J

1.

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2.

The instant petition has been preferred with following prayers:-

"A. Issue a direction to set aside the impugned order dated 16.08.2024 passed in Criminal Revision no. 95 of 2024 "Computer no. UPPB010022222024" (Natthu Lal vs. Ramautar and others) passed by Session Judge, Pilibhit and order dated 15.12.2023 passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court no. 2, Pilibhit passed in Complaint Case no. 3518 of 2023 (Ramautar vs. Natthulal) under sections 406, 323, 504 IPC, Police Station Barkheda, District-Pilibhit, wherein the learned concerned Magistrate have confirmed the order dated 15.12.2023 against the petitioner."

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner pressed all the grounds whatsoever has been taken through the instant petition through which, it has been apprised that there is hardly any attraction of sections in which the petitioner has been summoned and all these grounds have not been taken into consideration while passing the order dated 15.12.2023. Being aggrieved with order dated 15.12.2023, petitioner preferred revision which was also rejected vide order dated 16.08.2024 which has been challenged through the instant petition.

4.

Learned AGA for the State vehemently opposed the prayer sought through the instant petition.

5.

Be that as it may, no useful purpose shall be served by way of giving time for exchange of counter and rejoinder affidavit and keeping the matter pending before this Court and as such, learned Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court no. 2, Pilibhit/concerned court is hereby directed to expedite and finalize the proceedings of Complaint Case no. 3518 of 2023 (Ramautar vs. Nathu Lal and others) Police Station- Barkheda, District-Pilibhit, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of 12 months from the date of presentation of certified copy of this order before him without granting any unnecessary adjournment to either of the parties, but after giving full opportunity of hearing to both sides.

6.

It is also directed to the parties that no unnecessary adjournment shall be sought unless the same is unavoidable and both the parties are directed to cooperate with the learned court concerned for achieving the directions as made above.

7.

However, it is made clear that till the disposal of the above mentioned complaint case no.3518 of 2023 no coercive action shall be initiated against the petitioner.

8.

The instant petition is hereby disposed of accordingly.