BRIJ LAL CHAURASIYA Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Shri Amar Nath Dubey, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Sri Rajendra Kumar Dwivedi, learned Additional Government Advocate.

(2.) The Petitioner has challenged the order dated 03.01.2011 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Pratapgarh in Criminal Revision No. 59 of 2009, on the ground that the revision has been dismissed as not maintainable.

(3.) Learned Court of revision has observed that where the order impugned is appealable, there is a provision of appeal, the revision is not maintainable. Whereas learned Counsel for the Petitioner submits that the date of order impugned before the Court of revision, i.e. date of judgment of acquittal is 02.3.2009. The provision of appeal came into force on 31.12.2009. The remedy available against the order impugned shall be searched only in light of the provision provided on the date of order. He submits that since on the date of order of acquittal the remedy was only the revision to challenge the order impugned, the Petitioner rightly filed the revision. He supports his submission with a decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court rendered in the case of National Commission for Women v. State of Delhi and Anr., 2010 12 SCC 599, relevant paragraph 8 of which is reproduced herein under;