The High Court dismissed the application under Section 482 CrPC as infructuous. Although the applicant was absent, the court found no case for judicial interference after reviewing pleadings.
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. - 77
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 4956 of 2020
Applicant :- Vichitrapal Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Ashutosh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Gautam Chowdhary,J.
Case called out in revised list. No one is present on behalf of applicant to press this application. However, learned A.G.A. for the State is present.
The matter is an old one pending since 2020.
It appears that either the cause of action no more survives or the applicants have lost interest in this matter or it has otherwise become infructuous and, probably for this reason, none is interested to have decided this matter on merits and that is why, counsel for applicant is absent.
However, I have gone through the pleadings, grounds as also reliefs sought and find that the applicant is not able to make out a case so as to justify interference of this Court by granting reliefs, as prayed for.
In view of the above, the present application is dismissed as infructuous.
Order Date :- 23.11.2021 RPD
Vichitrapal
State Of U.P.
2 Others
Gautam Chowdhary
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
