SUMAN Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Mr. A.P. Tewari assisted by Mr. S. Kumar, learned counsel for the revisionists as well as learned A.G.A. on behalf of opposite party Nos. 1 and 2. No one is present on behalf of opposite party No. 3 (informant) despite the fact that she has been personally served with the notice as per the report dated 10.12.2013 of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Deoria. Learned counsel for the revisionists prays that the case be decided on merits today as it is pending since long specially in the light of the note appended on the top of the cause list that "no case shall be adjourned on the ground that learned counsel for the informant is not present". Learned counsel has further submitted that even after expiry of one year from personal service of notice the opposite party No. 3 (informant) has neither appeared nor engaged any counsel to argue the case on his behalf.

(2.) THE instant criminal revision is being preferred against the order dated 13.8.2013 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 17, Deoria in Criminal Case No. 310 of 2013 (State v. Udaiveer and others) under Sections 363 and 366 I.P.C., Police Station Khampur, district Deoria whereby the prosecutrix -revisionist No. 1 was sent to Nari Niketan.

(3.) IN the case of Smt. Parvati Devi (supra) the Division Bench of this Court has held that: