Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 192440 (ALL)

VIKAS KUMAR v. STATE OF U.P.

CRLR/5961/2024 · 2025-10-12

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 5961 of 2024 Court No. - 90 HON'BLE HARVIR SINGH, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the revisionist and learned AGA for the State. None is present for opposite party nos. 2, 3 and 4. 2. This revision has been filed against the order dated 21.8.2024 passed by Additional Session Judge, Court No. 4, Baghpat in S. T. No. 421 of 2022; State Versus Sitaram and others, under Sections-427, 323, 506, 308 and 325 IPC, P. S.-Khekara, district-Baghpat, by which application filed by the revisionist under Section 278 CrPC has been rejected. 3. Learned counsel for the revisionist submits that the date on which examination-in-chief of the revisionist was being conducted, revisionist by mistake in the statement got the date of incident recorded as 17.5.2021, whereas the said date ought to have been 15.3.2021. Learned counsel for the revisionist submits that the date of incident in the first information report as well as in the statement of the informant under Section 161 CrPC, is also recorded as 15.3.2021. 4. Learned counsel submits that it is barely the date of incident and the matter of record, which cannot be changed at the stage of trial, since the investigation has already been completed and the said date has already come on record. 5. On the other hand, learned AGA has submitted that whatever statement of any witness is recorded, the same is read over to the witness and no correction, whatsoever, can be made in the said statement and prayed that Versus Counsel for Revisionist(s) : Achyut Jee Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Sudhir Bharti, G.A. Vikas Kumar .....Revisionist(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) the revision is liable to be dismissed. 6. Having regard to the contentions made by learned counsel for the revisionist as well as of learned AGA, that the incident pertains to 15.3.2021 and even if the same was inadvertently written as 17.5.2021, the mere mistake of the date of incident will not change the nature of trial, specially when the said date has already come on record in the first information report as well as in the statement recorded under Section 161 CrPC, which forms part of the judicial record. 7. 7. Under the given facts and circumstances, the order dated 21.8.2024 is set aside and it is directed that the only correction which can be made, is the change of date from 17.5.2021 to 15.2.2021 and it will not have any effect on the merits of the case and to that extent, the correction is allowed to be made in the statement by passing a separate order by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 4, Baghpat. It is made clear that no other opinion has been expressed in respect of on going trial. 8. With the above, revision is disposed of. October 13, 2025 HR CRLR No. 5961 of 2024 2 (Harvir Singh,J.) Digitally signed by :- HEMANT RANJAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad