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
9 paragraphs · 206 wordsM. C. Jain, J.—List has been revised. None appeared for the revisionists.
Through this revision the revisionist has challenged the order, dated 12121994 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Budaun in Case No. 3790 of 1994. This order relates to the remand of the revisionists to jail custody. The validity has been challenged by .means of this revision.
Learned Single Judge on 1051995 referred the following question to a Division Bench:
"Whether an order of remand would be subjectmatter of a revision under. Section 397/401, Cr. PC. or not?"
A Division Bench consisting of Hon''ble Girdhar Malaviya and Hon''ble G.P. Mathur, JJ. was nominated to answer the question. The question has been answered by the said Division Bench in the following way:
"An order granting remand is a purely interlocutory order and no revision would lie against such an order in view of the bar created by subsection (2) of Section 397, Cr. P.C."
In view of the above answer, this revision is not maintainable and is hereby dismissed.
Learned A.G.A. is present on behalf of opposite party at the time of the passing of this order, though none is present for the revisionists, as mentioned in the beginning.
Revision dismissed.