Court dismissed a case pending since 2007 for want of prosecution following Apex Court directive in Asian Resurfacing. Application was in abeyance as no applicant counsel appeared to press the matter in revised list.
Application dismissed for want of prosecution; any interim order stands vacated.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 69
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 6078 of 2007
Applicant :- Har Prasad And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- U.N. Khare Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt. Advocate
Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.
Case called out in the revised list.
No one is present on behalf of the applicants to press this application even in the revised call.
Learned Additional Government Advocate is present.
The present case is pending since 2007 before this Court, in which proceedings of the court below was stayed by this Court at the initial stage of filing of the case but it was not extended after 20.3.2007.
On 28.3.2018, the Apex Court in the case of Asian Resurfacing of Road Agency Pvt. Ltd and others vs. Central Bureau of Investigation; AIR 2018 SC 2039 has directed that in all pending cases where stay against proceedings of a civil or criminal trial is operating, the same will come to an end on expiry of six months from today unless in an exceptional case by a speaking order such stay is extended.
In view of above, the present application is dismissed for the want of prosecution.
Interim order, if any, stands vacated.
Office is directed to communicate this order to the court concerned below.
Order Date :- 6.11.2019 IA
3 issues framed by the court
Whether to allow or dismiss the application for quashing proceedings (Order 482) given the lack of prosecution and direction to vacate automatic stays.
Whether the automatic stay order dated 20.3.2007 requires extension following the Apex Court directive in Asian Resurfacing.
Whether the judicial intervention on **want of prosecution** is justified in a case pending since 2007 without any revival by the applicant.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Asian Resurfacing of Road Agency Pvt. Ltd and others vs. Central Bureau of InvestigationExplained¶9
Asian Resurfacing of Road Agency Pvt. Ltd and others vs. Central Bureau of Investigation; AIR 2018 SC 2039 · Who else cites this
Har Prasad And Another
Vivek Kumar Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
