Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 61506 (ALL)

SHAKIR HUSAIN v. STATE OF U.P. AND 4 OTHERS

CRLRD/1643/2023 · 2025-08-20

Sameer Jain

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:144302 Court No. - 82 Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION DEFECTIVE No. - 1643 of 2023 Revisionist :- Shakir Husain Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others Counsel for Revisionist :- Girish Kumar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J. Order on Delay Condonation Application 1. Heard Sri Girish Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the revisionist and Sri Kunwar Tejendra Bahadur, learned AGA for the State. 2. Learned counsel for the revisionist submitted that however, instant revision is beyond time by 344 days but delay in filing the instant revision has been duly explained by revisionist in the affidavit filed in support of the instant delay condonation application. He further submitted that as applicant is very poor person and he was having family liabilities, therefore, he could not file the instant revision in time, therefore, delay in filing the instant revision be condoned and instant revision be heard on merit. 3. Learned AGA opposed the prayer for condonation of delay and submitted that instant revision is beyond time by 344 days and ground taken by revisionist in the delay condonation application appears to be vague and on such vague ground, such a huge delay should not be condoned. 4. I have heard both the parties and perused the record of the case. 5. The instant revision is beyond time by 344 days and however, revisionist tried to explain the delay in the affidavit filed in support of the instant delay condonation application but in paragraph no. 3 of the affidavit filed in support of the instant delay condonation application he only made averment that he is very poor person and having family liability. 6. In view of this Court the ground taken by applicant in the affidavit filed in support of the instant delay condonation application is vague and on such vague ground, delay of 344 days in filing the instant revision should not be condoned. 7. Accordingly, instant delay condonation application filed by revisionist is hereby dismissed. Order on memo of revision 1. As delay condonation application filed by the revisionist has already been dismissed by this Court, therefore, the instant revision also stands dismissed as time barred. Order Date :- 21.8.2025 KK Patel Digitally signed by :- KRISHN KANT PATEL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad