Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 197995 (ALL)

GIRJA SHANKER DUBEY v. SUB DIVISIONAL MAGISTRATE SADAR PRATAPGARH and ANOTHER

A227/21415/2017 · 2025-11-10

Saurabh Lavania

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 21415 of 2017 Court No. - 13 HON'BLE SAURABH LAVANIA, J. 1. Heard Sri Manuvendra Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Ajay Kumar Srivastava, learned AGA for the State of U.P. 2. The instant petition has been preferred seeking following main relief(s):- "I. Direct to the opposite party No. 1 to decide the Recall Application No 30/14/29/15 dated 07.05.2005 (Vivek Kumar Versus Girja Shanker) filed by the petitioner in original case No. 27/07/30/14 (Vivek Kumar Versus Girja Shanker) under section 145/146 Cr.P.C. pending before him 07.05.2005 within the stipulated time as this Hon'ble Court deems just and proper." 3. With regard to the prayer sought, quoted above, learned counsel for the petitioner stated that till date the opposite party No. 1/Sub Divisional Magistrate, Tehsil- Sadar, District- Pratapgarh (in short "Magistrate") has not decided the application in issue in the light of the order dated 11.07.2013 passed by the Additional District and Sessions Judge, Court No. 1, Pratapgarh (in short "Revisional Court") in Criminal Revision No. 322 of 2007 (Girja Shanker Dubey vs. State of U.P. and another). 4. Taking note of the aforesaid which includes the period of pendency of the application in issue, the present petition is disposed of with a direction to the Magistrate concerned to consider and decide the application in issue, as indicated in prayer clause of this petition quoted above, if the same has already not been decided till date, within a period of two months from the date of production of certified copy of this order, after affording full opportunity of hearing to the party(s) concerned. 5. t is made clear that the Court has not examined the merits of the case and the Magistrate concerned shall be free to decide the application in issue strictly in accordance with law. 6. With the aforesaid, the instant petition is disposed of. November 10, 2025 Arun/- Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Manuvendra Singh, Ashish Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Respondent(s) : Govt. Advocate (Saurabh Lavania,J.) Girja Shanker Dubey .....Petitioner(s) Sub Divisional Magistrate Sadar Pratapgarh And Another .....Respondent(s) Digitally signed by :- ARUN KUMAR GANGWAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench