Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Allahabad High Court

HARIOM SHARMAversusState of U.P. AND ANOTHER

Decided
Disposal
Dismiss other than merit(DD/Non Prosec./Abated)

Holding

The revision is dismissed for want of prosecution due to the revisionist's failure to appear.

Summary

The revisionist, Hariom Sharma, filed a criminal revision (No. 5823 of 2024) before the Allahabad High Court seeking relief against the State of U.P. and another party. The revisionist failed to appear when the matter was listed on 03.06.2025, and again failed to appear on the subsequent date. Counsel for the opposite parties, including Sunil Kumar and the Additional Government Advocate, were present. The court noted the repeated non-appearance of the revisionist and held that the proceeding could not continue without prosecution. Consequently, the court dismissed the revision for want of prosecution, ordering the revisionist to bear the costs. The order was pronounced by Justice Anish Kumar Gupta on 8 September 2025.

Issues considered

  • What is the appropriate course of action when a revisionist fails to appear for prosecution of a revision application?

Subjects

  • revision
  • criminal procedure
  • want of prosecution
  • dismissal
  • high court

Judgment

                                                   HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
                                                        CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 5823 of 2024

                                    Hariom Sharma
                                                                                               .....Revisionist(s)
                                                                       Versus

                                    State of U.P. and Another
                                                                                                    .....Opposite
                                                                                                          Party(s)

                                    Counsel for Revisionist(s)    : Ashish Kumar Gaur
                                    Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Prem Sagar Verma, Sunil Kumar

                                    Court No. - 88

                                    (SL No.220)
                                                       HON'BLE ANISH KUMAR GUPTA, J.

                                    1. List revised. None appears on behalf of the revisionist to press the
                                    instant application. Sri Sunil Kumar, learned counsel for the opposite
                                    party no.2 and Sri S.K. Ojha, learned A.G.A. for the State are present.

                                    2. Earlier also, the instant matter was listed on 03.06.2025 and none
                                    appeared on behalf of the revisionist.

                                    3. In view thereof, the instant revision is dismissed for want of
                                    prosecution.



                                                                                    (Anish Kumar Gupta,J.)
                                    September 8, 2025
                                    Shubham Arya




Digitally signed by :-
SHUBHAM ARYA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.