Amlan Jyoti Borooah vs State Of Assam & Ors on 23 January, 2009
4. Ld. counsel for the revisionist argued that impugned order
is based of surmises and conjectures without going through the
Crl. Revision No. 15/2021 Jyoti Vs. State page no. 2 of 5
entire material and facts of the record. It is also submitted that
impugned order is against the principle of natural justice and same is
biased one causing material prejudice and grave injustice to the
revisionist. One of the contentions of the ld. counsel is that ld. trial
court failed to appreciate the fact that jewellary belongs to the
revisionist as given to her by her parents at the time of her marriage.
Moreover, it is also pointed out that impugned order is not speaking
one and hence is unfair, unjustified, unreasonable, misconceived,
totally illegal and against the legal propositions of law. It is prayed for
setting aside of the impugned order dated 16.12.2020.