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
3 paragraphs · 124 wordsG. Malviya, J.
Heard Sri R.P. Tripathi the learned counsel for the State and also the learned counsel for the applicant.
The revisional Court should not have dismissed the revision in default. Even if applicant was not present, the Revisional court should have considered the case on merit and dispose it of in accordance with law Without hearing the applicant and without considering the revision on merit the order dated 30.8.88 passed in Criminal Misc. case No. 2 of 1988 by X Addl. District Judge Bulandshahr is rendered bad and is quashed. The said revision shall be restored its original number, and after fixing a date, shall be disposed of in accordance with law. This application is accordingly allowed at the stage of admission.