UMA GUPTA Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Despite time being granted under the order of the Court dated 7.8.2012, neither learned AGA nor the counsel for the complainant have been able to produce any further material which could be said to have been collected after the order under Section 173(8) Cr.P.C. was passed on 1.1.2010 which could justify the review of the earlier order of the State Government refusing grant to sanction for prosecution. Sri Umesh Narayan Sharma, learned Senior Advocate, assisted by Sri Chandan Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner, with reference to the judgment of the High Court in the case of Vijai Bahadur v. State of U.P. and others, 1988 2 AWC 1289, submits that once an order refusing to sanction the prosecution has been passed, the same cannot be reviewed on some material.

(2.) Fact of in short as borne out from the records are as follows.

(3.) It may be noticed that the State Government vide order dated 30.1.2002 directed that censor entry be recorded in the character roll of the petitioner qua her being negligent and indisciplined. Not being satisfied, the petitioner filed representation against the order of adverse entry.