Court No. - 84
Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION DEFECTIVE No. - 258 of 2000 Revisionist :- Rakesh Kumar And Another Opposite Party :- Vth A.S.J. Meerut And Others Counsel for Revisionist :- Vijay Prakash Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt. Advocate,S. K. Tyagi
Hon'ble Manish Kumar,J.
Case called out in the revised list. No one appears on behalf of the revisionist. Learned A.G.A. is present.
The present criminal revision has been preferred against the judgment and order dated 18.7.2000 passed by 5th Additional Sessions Judge, Meerut in Criminal Appeal No.8 of 2000 out of Complaint Case No.1664 of 1999, under Section 420 of I.P.C.
Today the matter is listed under the heading of defective criminal revision and the defect as indicated that certified copy of the order dated 14.1.2000 is not filed alongwith the criminal revision.
This Court vide its order dated 11.8.2000 has issued notice to opposite party no.3 to file counter affidavit and also called for the record.
Learned A.G.A. has stated that the matter could be argued without filing of the counter affidavit.
The brief facts of the case are that the complainant Rakesh Kumar is the director of the firm M/s Vishal Hatcharies and Chickens Pvt. Ltd. and he knew the accused/appellant. On 1.1.1997, the accused/appellant came to the firm of the complainant and asked to sell one day old chickens. The complainant became ready to sell the one day old chickens to the accused persons. The accused/appellants purchased the chickens 6352 in number worth Rs.28524/- and assured the complainant that payment of these chickens shall be made by 20.1.1997. Inspite of the commitment, accused did not make any payment to the complainant and hence the present complaint case was preferred. In the said complaint case, judgment has been passed by the 5th Chief Judicial Magistrate, Meerut found the accused persons guilty of offence committed under Section 420 of I.P.C. and awarded one year rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs.15000/-. Against the said order/judgment dated 14.1.2000, appeal has been preferred which was also dismissed vide order/judgment dated 18.7.2000 by 5th Additional Sessions Judge, Meerut and against the said judgement/order dated 18.7.2000, the present criminal revision has been preferred in which no stay order has been passed rather time was granted to the opposite parties to file counter affidavit.
I have gone through the judgment and the grounds taken in the criminal revision, the imprisonment of one year was awarded under Section 420 of I.P.C. for offence committed under Section 420 I.P.C. in the year 2000 and 19 years have been lapsed. The accused persons must have undergone the said punishment.
From a perusal of the record there no interim order was granted, it appears that due to efflux of time, the present revision has become infructuous.
Accordingly, the present revision is dismissed as infructuous. Interim order, if any, stands vacated.
Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial court concerned which may proceed in accordance with law, if any further action is required.
It is made clear that it is open for the revisionist to move appropriate application before this Court within three months from today, if the matter survives.
Order Date :- 19.12.2019 Anil K. Sharma