The court held that the contempt petition was infructuous because the applicant did not appear to press the petition. The petition was dismissed.
Contempt notices discharged; petition dismissed as infructuous.
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-LKO:705
Court No. - 19
Case :- CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 1764 of 2021
Applicant :- Shrikrishna Opposite Party :- Avneesh Kumar Awasthi Prin Secy Home/Addl.Chief Secy. Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Rajendra Prasad Shukla,Pallavi Dubey
Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J.
Case called out.
None present for the petitioner, however, learned Standing Counsel for the State is present.
It seems that the petitioner has no interest to press the present contempt petition. Thus, it has become infructuous.
Accordingly, the contempt petition is dismissed as having become infructuous.
Contempt notices are hereby discharged.
If the petitioner feels that the cause of action still survives, they may move an application for recall of the order within eight weeks.
Consigned to record.
Order Date :- 3.1.2024 Mohd. Sharif
Digitally signed by :- MOHAMMAD SHARIF High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the contempt petition should be dismissed as infructuous due to the non-appearance of the applicant.
Shrikrishna
Mohd. Sharif
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
