Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
  4. /
  5. 2018
  6. /
  7. January

Hansraj Viskarma vs State Of U P And Another

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|17 September, 2018
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Court No. - 41
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 9730 of 2005 Petitioner :- Hansraj Viskarma Respondent :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Petitioner :- Sujeet Kumar,R.K. Tripathi Counsel for Respondent :- Govt. Advocate,Dinesh Rai,Mithilesh Kr.Gupta,Ram Dawar,Sarvesh Kumar,V.K. Nagaich
Hon'ble Aniruddha Singh,J.
1- None is present on behalf of the petitioner even in the revised list/call. Sri Mithilesh Kumar Gupta, learned counsel for the respondent no. 2 is present.
2- Heard learned A.G.A. for the State, learned counsel appearing for respondent no.2 and perused the record and the writ petition is being decided on merit.
3- This criminal writ petition has been preferred by the petitioner against the order dated 13.7.2004 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Varanasi, whereby the petitioner was summoned under Sections 147/323/452/504/506/379 I.P.C. against that order Criminal Revision No.442 of 2004 filed by the petitioner was also dismissed vide order dated 9.8.2005 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.5, Varanasi. Later on, one discharge application was moved by Surendra Patel, Hansraj Vishwakarma, Hridaya Narayan, Bihari and Jawahar Lal on behalf of the petitioner. Vide order dated 12.9.2012, the petitioners were discharged under Sections 147/323/452/504/506/379 I.P.C. in complaint case no.810 of 2012.
4- Initially summoning order was passed in complaint case no.3031 of 2003 but when the complaint was transferred in another court, the number was changed.
5- Learned counsel for the respondent no.2 has admitted the fact and produced the copy of the order dated 12.9.2012 passed by Judicial Magistrate, II, Varanasi whereby the petitioner was discharged. Learned counsel for opposite party no. 2 further that this writ petition has become infructuous because the petitioner has already been discharged in the above complaint case.
6- Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed as infructuous. Interim order, if any, stands vacated.
7- Copy of this order be transmitted to the court concerned for compliance.
Order Date :- 17.9.2018/OP
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Hansraj Viskarma vs State Of U P And Another

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
17 September, 2018
Judges
  • Aniruddha Singh
Advocates
  • Sujeet Kumar R K Tripathi