# working day to ensure that no process is lying unattended or unreturned by the due date

- **Citation:** C.L.No. 109/VIIC-25
- **Court:** Allahabad High Court
- **Decided:** 1994-11-30
- **Case number:** C.L.No. 109/VIIC-25
- **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/allahabad-high-court/working-day-to-ensure-that-no-process-is-lying-unattended-or-unreturned-by-the-163645
- **Pages:** 1

## Text

376

I am, therefore, to request you kindly to direct that the Chief Judicial Magistrate
will peruse the register of the process of this Court maintained in his office on each
working day to ensure that no process is lying unattended or unreturned by the due date.
Service Report of notices sent to Chief Judicial Magistrates for service upon the
persons.
C.L.No. 109/VIIC-25, Admn. (G) Dated: Allahabad: November 30, 1994

I am directed to say that while exercising original jurisdiction on criminal
contempt and civil contempt this Court sends a motion of notice in contempt proceedings
for procuring the attendance of the contemnor. It has been observed by the Court that
whenever such notices are sent for service upon the persons concerned the court is not
obliged in the proceedings or the court.

I am, therefore, to say that whenever such notices are sent to the Chief Judicial
Magistrates of the Districts for service upon the persons concerned a report about the fate
of the same should invariably be transmitted to the Court indicating whether it has been
served or not, accepted or refused before the date of hearing of the case as mentioned in
the notices.

Kindly instruct the Chief Judicial Magistrate of your judgeship to ensure strict
compliance as above.
56. REVISIONS
G.L. No. 15/X dated 20th September, 1951
 Unless on a perusal of the judgment and the grounds of Criminal Revision filed
under section 435 (new section 397) of the Code of Criminal Procedure the Judge is
satisfied that notice should be issued, counsel for the applicant may be heard first. Notice
should be issued to State Counsel and the opposite parties (if any) if the court after
hearing counsel for the applicant is satisfied that there is prima facie some merit in the
application.
 These instructions do not fetter the discretion of Sessions Judges to dispose of any
revision application without hearing any party as provided under section 440 (new
section 403) of the Code of Criminal Procedure; and where an application appears to be
obviously frivolous or groundless there is no reason why a Sessions Judge may not, if he
thinks fit, reject it without even hearing counsel for the applicant.
C.L. No. 63/IV h-14 dated 12th June, 1979

Sessions Judges should see that criminal revisions are equally distributed for
hearing in the file of Sessions Judges and Additional Sessions Judges.
C.L. No. 6/VIII-188/Admn.(G) dated 24th January, 1989
The Court has noticed that piecemeal decisions are being given by the Sessions
Judges hearing criminal revisions against the one and the same order creating an
anomalous position.