Dr. Prem Narayan v. State of U.P.
Case brief
What is this about?
The applicant challenged the adjournment of an application under Section 319 Cr.P.C. The court held that the adjournment was not manifestly erroneous, no procedural irregularity existed, and the application was premature as the Section 319 application was not rejected. The matter was dismissed.
What did the court decide?
Application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. dismissed as prematurity and no manifest error found in adjournment.