In a transfer application alleged to be for lack of prosecution due to unlisted hearings and unavailable addresses, the court dismissed the petition.
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. - 89
Case :- TRANSFER APPLICATION (CRIMINAL) No. - 29 of 2021
Applicant :- Shakuntala Sharma And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ram Raksha Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Anil Kumar Ojha,J.
Case taken up in the revised lit. None present either on behalf of he applicants or O.P. No.2.
Heard learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
Perusal of the order sheet reveals that this transfer application was listed on 22.3.2022 and on that date also nobody was present either on behalf of the applicants or O.P. No.2.The order sheet further reveals that correct address of O.P. No.2 has not been provided by the applicants.
In view of the above, this transfer application is dismissed for want of prosecution.
Order Date :- 13.4.2022 mt
Digitally signed by MITHILESH KUMAR Date: 2022.04.18 10:32:35 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Shakuntala Sharma and 2 Others
State of U.P.
Another
Anil Kumar Ojha
Mithlesh Kumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
