UMA SHANKAR PANDEY Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri S.P. Srivastava, learned counsel for the revisionist and the learned A.G.A. for the State.

(2.) The revisionist moved an application under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. against Opp. Party Nos. 2 to 5' before the A.C.J.M. IXth Allahabad which was allowed by the learned Magistrate vide order dated 11.2.2003, whereby, the learned Magistrate directed' the station officer Meja' District Allahabad to register' the first information report and investigate the same.

(3.) It appears that the revision when came to know about the order dated 11.2.2003, challenged the same by means of filing Criminal Revision No. 462 of 2003 ( Urmila Devi State State of U.P. and others)? before the learned Sessions Judge, Allahabad? and the same was heard by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.7, Allahabad' and the said revision of the revisionist was allowed on 29.3.2005 by which the revisional court set aside the order dated 11.2.2003 passed bythe learned Magistrate hence, the present revision has been filed by the revisionist challenging the order dated 29.3.2005.