Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 196700 (ALL)

MADHAV RAM KURMI AND ANOTHER v. STATE OF U.P.

CRLA/1964/2003 · 2025-12-19

Babita Rani, Rajnish Kumar

Criminal Appealbody2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 1964 of 2003 Court No. - 10 HON'BLE RAJNISH KUMAR, J. HON'BLE MRS. BABITA RANI, J. IA 24 of 2025 1.In deference to the order dated 18.12.2025, the appellant no.1 Mahdav Ram Kurmi and the appellant no.2 Kashi Ram are present in person, who have been brought by Sri Bhanu Prakash Yadav, Sub Inspector, Police Station Sriduttanj, District Balrampur and they have been identified by their counsel Sri Pintoo, who has moved this application. 2. This application has been moved for withdrawl of the appeal. 3. Sri Pintoo, learned counsel for the appellants submits that the appellant no.1 has been released by the Government on remission by means of the order dated 12.02.2019 and the appellant no.2 has been released on remission by the State Government by means of the order dated 07.02.2019 and, accordingly, they have been released from jail. He further submits that now the appellants do not want to pursue this appeal, therefore, this appeal may be dismissed as withdrawn. 4.Learned counsel for the appellants relies on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court dated 28.01.2025 passed in Criminal Appeal No.2489/2014(Kishan Lal versus State through Jail Superintendent). 5. The appellants who are present before this Court, on a query, Versus Counsel for Appellant(s) : K.N.Misra, Abdul Rafey Siddiqui, Amar Singh, Ambrish Dubey Shyam, G.P. Tiwari, Munni Lal Yadav, Pintoo Counsel for Respondent(s) : Govt.Advocate, N.U.Khan Madhav Ram Kurmi And Another .....Appellant(s) State of U.P. .....Respondent(s) categorically state that now they do not want to pursue this appeal and it may be dismissed as withdrawn. They also admitted that they have been released on remission granted by the Government. 6. Learned AGA, though opposed the request made by learned counsel for the appellants, however, in view of the order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court relied by learned counsel for the appellants, he could not oppose the request. 7. Accordingly, the application is allowed. On Appeal 8. The appeal is dismissed as withdrawn. 9. The order has been passed in presence of Sri Amar Singh, learned Amicus appointed by this Court. December 19, 2025 Akanksha Sri/- CRLA No. 1964 of 2003 2 (Mrs. Babita Rani,J.) (Rajnish Kumar,J.) Digitally signed by :- AKANKSHA SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Digitally signed by :- AKANKSHA SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench