BILLU Vs. STATE OF U. P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the revisionists, learned A.G.A. for the State by means of Video Conferencing and perused the record.

(2.) Challenge in this Revision is the judgement and order dtd. 3/11/2021 passed by Additional Sessions Judge (Rape Cases & POCSO Act) Sambhal at Chandausi in Appeal No. 20 of 2020 under Sec. 101 of Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act wrongly filed under Sec. 374 (2) Cr.P.C. (Billu @ Anandi and Another Vs. State of U.P. and Another) whereby learned Appellate Court dismissed the appeal on the ground of not pressed by counsel for appellants and affirmed the conviction order dtd. 21/12/2020 passed by Juvenile Justice Board, District Sambhal in Case Crime No. 536 of 2005 under Ss. 376, 506 I.P.C., P.S. Rajpura, District Sambhal convicting and sentencing the appellants under Sec. 376 I.P.C. for a period of three years each and under Sec. 506 I.P.C. convicted the appellants for two years each. Further directed that both the sentences shall run concurrently. Learned counsel for the Revisionists raised only one point that order dated 03. 11.2021 is illegal as the appeal has been dismissed on the ground of not pressed by the counsel for the Revisionists.

(3.) I agree with the aforesaid contention of learned counsel for the Revisionists. Relevant portion of the order dtd. 3/11/2021 is quoted below:- <IMG>JUDGEMENT_173_LAWS(ALL)2_2022_1.jpg</IMG>