In a criminal miscellaneous writ petition regarding maintenance, the Allahabad High Court dismissed the petition for want of prosecution due to the lapse of time. Neither the petitioner nor other respondents appeared.
None, petition dismissed for want of prosecution.
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. - 88
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 1454 of 2005
Petitioner :- Sunil Dhandhoria Respondent :- State of U.P. and Others Counsel for Petitioner :- A.K. Dixit Counsel for Respondent :- Govt. Advocate,R.K.Srivastava,Sameer Kr. Pandey
Hon'ble Syed Aftab Husain Rizvi,J.
Case taken up in the revised call. None is present either for the petitioner or for the respondent nos. 2 and 3. Learned A.G.A. is present.
The matter relates to the maintenance proceeding. It appears that due to lapse of time the matter has become infructuous.
The writ petition is dismissed for want of prosecution.
Order Date :- 22.11.2022 Masarrat
Digitally signed by MASARRAT HUSAIN Date: 2022.11.24 10:58:42 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Sunil Dhandhoria
State of U.P.
Syed Aftab Husain Rizvi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
