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
7 paragraphs · 264 wordsB.K. Rathi, J.—Heard Sri A.K. Mishra and learned A.G.A.
This revision u/s 397, Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed against the order dated 3.4.1993 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Allahabad in Criminal Revision No. 269 of 1991.
The facts giving rise to this revision are as follows:
Proceedings u/s 145, Code of Criminal Procedure between the applicants and opposite party Nos. 2 to 4 were decided by the Magistrate by order dated 26.10.1991 in favour of the applicant. He directed that possession be delivered to applicants. Against that order, opposite party Nos. 2 to 4 preferred a criminal revision No. 269 of 1991 in which impugned order was passed. Learned Additional Sessions Judge allowed the revision and sent the matter for reconsideration to the Magistrate into certain direction. He also passed order directing the parties to maintain status quo. Against that order, applicant preferred revision.
On perusal of the order, I find that learned Magistrate passed order on the basis of report of Naib Tahsildar and on the basis of photo copies. The Additional Sessions Judge held that these photo copies and report are not admissible in evidence and he accordingly set aside the order of the Magistrate and sent back the record for redecision. There is no illegality in the order.
However, it is observed that matter is very old and therefore, I direct that Magistrate will decide the matter within three months from the date of receipt of record in his Court.
With the above observations, revision is dismissed. The stay order dated 26.4.1993 is vacated.