Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Allahabad High Court

MANGEY RAMversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

Decided

Holding

The revision petition is dismissed as infructuous because the petitioner is no longer able to pursue the relief.

Summary

Mangey Ram filed a revision petition in the Allahabad High Court challenging the judgment of the Additional Sessions Judge (Special Judge, SC/ST Act) which upheld his conviction under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, and affirmed a sentence of one year imprisonment with a compensation of Rs.9,50,000. The petition sought to set aside the conviction and sentence imposed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hapur. During the hearing, counsel for the petitioner informed the court that the petitioner was no longer alive, rendering the petition infructuous. The court held that a revision cannot proceed when the petitioner is deceased or otherwise unable to pursue the relief. Consequently, the revision petition was dismissed as infructuous.

Issues considered

  • Whether a revision petition remains maintainable when the petitioner is no longer alive or able to pursue the relief.
  • Whether the earlier conviction and sentence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act can be set aside in such circumstances.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • revision
  • criminal procedure
  • Section 138
  • Negotiable Instruments Act
  • compensation
  • infructuous petition
  • conviction upheld

Judgment

                                             HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
                                                      CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 665 of 2021

                                    Mangey Ram
                                                                                               .....Revisionist(s)
                                                                       Versus

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

                                    Counsel for Revisionist(s)                  :   Ravindra Pratap Singh
                                    Counsel for Opposite Party(s)               :   G.A.

                                    Court No. - 85
                                                          HON'BLE MANOJ BAJAJ, J.

                                    Petitioner has filed this revision petition to challenge the impugned
                                    judgment dated 29.01.2021 passed by Additional Sessions Judge/Special
                                    Judge (SC/ST Act), Hapur in Criminal Appeal No.33 of 2020, titled
                                    Mangey Ram Vs. State of U.P. and another, whereby the judgment of
                                    conviction and order of sentence dated 02.11.2020 passed by Chief
                                    Judicial Magistrate, Hapur, in Complaint Case No.1379 of 2013,
                                    convicting the petitioner under Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act,
                                    1881, has been upheld. The sentence of one year simple imprisonment
                                    alongwith compensation of Rs.9,50,000/- imposed upon the accused-
                                    petitioner by the trial court has also been affirmed.

                                    Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the petition has become
                                    infructuous as the revisionist is no more.

                                    In view of the above, the revision petition is dismissed as infructuous.



                                                                                               (Manoj Bajaj,J.)
                                    April 22, 2026
                                    R./




Digitally signed by :-
RAJEEV KUMAR SACHDEVA
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.