- (1.) List has been revised. None responds on behalf of the revisionist and the opposite parties no.2, 3 and 4. Learned A.G.A. is present on behalf of the State of U.P.
(2.) The revisionist by way of filing this revision has sought to quash the impugned judgement and order dated 24.2.2014 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, J.P. Nagar, District Amroha in Criminal Revision No.418 of 2013 (Nafisul and others Vs. State of U.P. and another).
(3.) The revision of the opposite parties was allowed firstly; on the ground that the witnesses were present on the spot but they have not made an attempt to stop the tractor on which the stolen cut wood were being carried; secondly on the ground that on perusal of the enquiry paper No.12 b and 13 b produced by the opposite parties 'Neem' tree was not found standing on Gata No.138, so there was no question of cutting the 'Neem' tree by them. The finding recorded by the revisional court is against the face of evidence on record. Khasra of the said land clearly show that certain neem and mango trees were standing on the land in question. Photostat copy of the same has been filed along with the affidavit filed in support of this revision. It is further argued that the impugned order is palpably erroneous and against the provisions of law and is, therefore, liable to be set aside.;