RATAN Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) U. S. Tripathi, J. List revised. None present from the side of applicants.

(2.) HEARD the learned AGA and perused the record.

(3.) THE contention of the applicants was that no offence under Section 395, IPC was made out on the allegation of the prosecution. This point may be raised before the Sessions Court at the time of framing of charges, in this way I find no force in the revision.