abhimenu.criminal revision

8/8/2019 Abhimenu.criminal Revision

1/4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

********

Criminal Revision No. of 2008

(Under Section 397, 401 Cr.P.C.)

(DISTRICT : SAHARANPUR)

1. Case Crime No. 234 of 2007

2. Police Station Sarsawa.

3. Under Section 60/72 Excise act

4. District Saharanpur

5. Case No.18 of 2007

6. Appeal No.64 of 2009

1. Abhimenu, Son of Abal Singh.Resident of Village Badhla, P.S. Medical,

District Meerut.

..Revisionist/Applicant

Versus

State of U.P. ..Opposite Party

This criminal revisions is being preferred against the Judgement and Order dated

06.8.2009 passed by Shri Rakesh Kumar, Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.4,

Saharanpur dismissed the appeal and Judgement of the District Magistrate Saharanpur is

up held Appeal No.64 of 2009 (Abhimenu Vs. State of U.P.) and against the

Ju dgeme nt an d Or d er date d 10.12.2008 passed by District Magistrate, Saharanpur

Case No.18 of 2007 (State Vs. Abhimenu) Under Section 60/72 Excise act P.S- Sarsawa

District- Saharanpur and confiscate the vehicle no. UA07-TC4750 indica car

The present Criminal Revision is being preferred by the Revisionist/Applicant

before the Honble Court, inter alia on the following amongst other :-


2/4

G R O U N D

1. Because, the impugned Judgment and Order dated 10.12.2008 passed byDistrict Magistrate and impugned Judgment and Order dated 06.8.2009

passed by Additional Sessions Judge is illegal, arbitrary and not sustainable

in the eye of law.

2. Because, the Learned Court below has not appreciated the material evidenceon record in right perspective and illegally recorded the finding of Dismissedthe appeal.

3. Because, the Learned Court below has completely misread misinterpretedand mis-appreciated the evidence on record.

4. Because, the reasoning recorded by the Court below in Dismissed the appealof the Revisionist/Applicant is based on surmises and conjuncture, without

applying the settled principles of the appreciation of evidence, hence the

Judgment and Order is liable to be set aside.

5. Because, the Learned Court below has completely misread misinterpretedand mis-appreciated the evidence on record while recording the finding of

dismissed the appeal, which is wholly unsustainable and is therefore liable to

be set aside.

6. Because, the reasoning recorded by Court below in dismissed the appeal ofthe revisionist is based on surmises and conjectures, without applying the

rattled principal of appreciation of evidence, hence the Judgment and order is

liable to be set aside.

7. Because, the view taken by the Court below is wholly erroneous, as such, cannot be sustained in the eyes of Law and is liable to be set aside.

8. Because, that the revisionist was seriously ill on 05.01.2009 to 02.03.2009, sonot file this appeal during this period.

9. Because, that it is relevant to mention here that this Honble Court maykindly be pleased to condone the delay and treat the same to be filed within

time.


3/4

P R A Y E R

It is, therefore, Most Respectfully prayed that this Honble Court may kindly be

pleased to allow this Revision and set aside the impugned Judgment and Order dated

06.08.2009 passed by, Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.4 Saharanpur, in Appeal

No.64 of 2009 (Abhimenu Vs. State of U.P.) and direct the court below to decide the

appeal on merit or pass any other and further order in favor of the

Revisionist/Applicant which this Honble Court may deem fit and proper under thecircumstances of the present case.

It is further prayed that allow the revision and set aside the order dated

06.08.2009 in delay miscellaneous application and treat the appeal with in time and

provided the opportunity of hearing on merit and Revisionists/Applicants shall suffer

irreparable loss and injury.

Dated : ____ ,. 2009 (Birendra Singh Khokher)Advocate

Counsel for the Revisionists/Applicants,Room No.41M

Old Building, High Court, Allahabad.Mobile : 9412104014


4/4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD********

INDEXIN

Criminal Revision No. of 2008

(Under Section 397, 401 Cr.P.C.)(DISTRICT : SAHARANPUR)

Abhimenu....Revisionist/ApplicantVersus

State of U.P.....Opposite Party

Sl.No. Particulars of Documents Dates Annex. Pages

1. Memo of Criminal Revision

2. A Certified copy of the Judgement

and Order passed by AdditionalSessions Judge, Court No.4,Saharanpur, in Appeal No.64 of 2009(Abhimenu Vs. State of U.P.)

06.8.2009

3. A type copy of the Judgement andOrder passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.4, Saharanpur, inAppeal No.64 of 2009 (Abhimenu Vs.State of U.P.)

06.8.2009

3. A Certified/Photocopy of the

Judgement and Order passed byDistrict Magistrate, Saharanpur CaseNo.18 of 2007

10.12.2008

4. Memo of Appearance (Parcha)

Dated : ____ . 2009 ( Birendra Singh Khokher )Advocate

Counsel for the Revisionists/Applicants,Room No.41M

Old Building, High Court, Allahabad.Mobile : 9412104014