Criminal Misc. Writ Petition dismissed as infructuous. Counsel for petitioners were absent despite notice. Court, after reviewing pleadings, found no prima facie case for interference.
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. - 83
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 10526 of 2013
Petitioner :- Bhupendra Kumar And 3 Others Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Petitioner :- Sudamaji Shandilya,Manish Tiwary,S.U. Zaman Counsel for Respondent :- Govt. Advocate,Ali Hasan,K.S.Yadav,Ray Sahab Yadav
Hon'ble Gautam Chowdhary,J.
Case called out in revised list. No one is present on behalf of petitioners to press this petition. However, learned A.G.A. for the State is present.
The matter is an old one pending since 2013.
It appears that either the cause of action no more survives or the petitioners 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 petitioners is absent.
However, I have gone through the pleadings, grounds as also reliefs sought and find that the petitioners are 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 petition is dismissed as infructuous.
Office is directed to communicate the order passed by this Court to the concerned Court below.
Order Date :- 8.8.2022 S.Ali
Digitally signed by SHAUKAT ALI Date: 2022.08.11 11:27:14 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Bhupendra Kumar And 3 Others
State of U.P. and Another
Gautam Chowdhary
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
