A writ petition challenging an externment order was dismissed as infructuous because the challenged order had become unenforceable due to the efflux of over two and a half years.
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. - 86
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 26255 of 2018
Petitioner :- Shivam Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Petitioner :- Rajesh Kumar Dubey Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Umesh Kumar,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.G.A.
This is a writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeks to challenge order dated 6.8.2018 passed by Additional District Magistrate (Finance and Revenue) Amroha, in case no. 00269 of 2018 (State Vs. Shivam) under Section 3/4 of U.P. Control of Goonda Act, 1970, P.S.- Gajraula, DistrictAmroha, ordering externment of the petitioner for a period of six months.
The submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the order of externment for six months was passed on 6.8.2018 which has elapsed for more than two and a half year back thus the present petition has become infructuous by efflux of time.
In view of the above, this writ petition has become infructuous and it is, accordingly, disposed of.
Interim order, granted earlier, stands discharged.
Order Date :- 1.9.2021 S.Verma
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Shivam
State of U.P.
Another
Umesh Kumar, J.
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
