Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 78414 (ALL)

IMRAN ANSARI v. State of U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

CRLR/3781/2024 · 2025-08-11

Madan Pal Singh

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:137101 Court No. - 91 Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 3781 of 2024 Revisionist :- Imran Ansari Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Revisionist :- Piyush Patel,Pradeep Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- Chandra Prakash Singh,G.A. Hon'ble Madan Pal Singh,J. 1. Case is called out in the revised list. Mr. Pradeep Kumar, learned counsel for the revisionist, Mr. Chandra Prakash Singh, learned counsel for opposite party no.2 and the learned A.G.A. are present. 2. On 6th August, 2024, following order was passed by a Coordinate Bench of this Court: "Instant criminal revision has been preferred against the impugned judgment and order dated 02.07.2024 passed by learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Maharajganj under section 125 Cr.P.C. (Smt. Aabida alias Gudiya and another vs. Imran Ansari), in maintenance case no.776 of 2022. By the impugned judgment, the learned court below has rejected the recall application moved by the applicant/ opposite party and fixed the date for exparty evidence which cost is not paid. Issue notice to respondent no.2 returnable at an early date, through CJM, concerned. List as fresh on 11.09.2024. The applicant is directed to deposit the cost imposed by the court below within a week and if the amount imposed is deposited, the court below is also directed to not taken any coercive action against the applicant." 3. Learned counsel for the parties fairly submit that pursuant to the above order, the revisionist has deposited the cost of Rs. 5,000/- imposed by the court below and the said amount has been obtained by opposite party no.2 also. 4. On the instruction received, learned counsel for the revisionist states that since after depositing the money of cost, his written submission has been accepted by the court below therefore, the present revision has become infructuous. 5. Learned counsel for opposite party no.2 and the learned A.G.A. could not dispute the same. 6. The present criminal revision is, accordingly, dismissed as having become infructuous. 7. Interim order, if any, stands discharged. (Madan Pal Singh, J.) Order Date :- 12.8.2025 Sushil/- Digitally signed by :- SUSHIL KUMAR SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad