Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 3314 (ALL)

ABDUL HAKEEM ALIAS MUNNA v. STATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

CRLR/2749/2025 · 2026-05-06

Lakshmi Kant Shukla

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 2749 of 2025 Court No. - 45 HON'BLE LAKSHMI KANT SHUKLA, J. 1. Heard Mr. Mahesh Kumar Dubey, learned counsel for the revisionist, learned A.G.A. appearing on behalf of the State and Mr. Munna Babu, learned counsel for opposite party no. 2. 2. Revisionist Abdul Hakeem alias Munna has approached this Court by means of present Criminal Revision challenging the validity of the impugned order dated 30.04.2025 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge/F.T.C., Court No. 1, Prayagraj (hereinafter referred to as "the Trial Court") in Sessions Trial No.205 of 2025, State v. Abdul Hakeem alias Munna, whereby the Trial Court rejected the revisionist's application for discharged moved under Section 227 Cr.P.C. 3. Feeling aggrieved by the aforesaid order, the present criminal revision has been filed on the ground that the impugned order is not sustainable in the eye of law. The Trial Court passed the impugned order without applying the judicial mind and considering the facts and evidence available on record. It is thus contended by learned counsel for the revisionist that the impugned order is liable to be set aside by this Court invoking revisional jurisdiction. 4. Per contra, the learned counsel for opposite party no. 2 as well as the learned A.G.A. for the State vehemently opposed the criminal revision and apprised the Court that the charge in the case has already been framed. Therefore, the question of discharge has now become infructuous. Versus Counsel for Revisionist(s) : Mahesh Kumar Dubey Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Munna Babu Abdul Hakeem Alias Munna .....Revisionist(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) 5. When confronted with above, learned counsel for the revisionist could not dislodge the factual and legal submission of the learned A.G.A. 6. Having heard the rival submissions of the learned counsel for parties and the fact that the charge has already been framed in the matter, this Court finds merit in the submission of the learned A.G.A. The revision is devoid of merit and is liable to be dismissed. 7. Accordingly, the instant Criminal Revision is dismissed. May 7, 2026 Brijesh Maurya CRLR No. 2749 of 2025 2 (Lakshmi Kant Shukla,J.) Digitally signed by :- BRIJESH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad