In an application under Section 482 CrPC, the Allahabad High Court dismissed the matter for want of prosecution because the applicant's counsel failed to appear on three separate listing dates.
None. The application is 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.
Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:110908
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
(Sl No.3)
Court No. - 79
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 5709 of 2024
Applicant :- Smt Tripati Mittal Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ashok Kumar,Ashwini Kumar Srivastava
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Anish Kumar Gupta,J.
1. None appeared on behalf of the applicant to press the instant application. Sri Rajeev Kumar Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State is present.
2. From the perusal of the previous orders dated 04.03.2024 and 03.05.2024 it appears that on both the dates the counsel for the applicant did not appear before the Court from the beginning.
3. Again, the case was listed on 25.06.2024 and none was present.
4. In view thereof, the instant application is dismissed for want of prosecution .
Order Date :- 9.7.2024 Shubham Arya
(Anish Kumar Gupta, J.)
Digitally signed by :- SHUBHAM ARYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
1 issue framed by the court
Whether an application under Section 482 CrPC should be allowed when the applicant's counsel fails to appear for hearings over multiple dates?
Smt Tripati Mittal
State of U.P.
Anish Kumar Gupta
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
