Counsel for the petitioner reported loss of contact with his client and no instructions, and respondent No.4 noted non-compliance with mediation terms. The writ petition was dismissed for want of instructions.
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:71555-DB
Court No. - 10
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 1170 of 2022
Petitioner :- Saurabh Rousha
Respondent :- State Of Up Thru.Addl.Chief Secy.Dept Of Home And Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Alok Kr. Misra,Suresh Kumar Pandey
Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Sudhanshu Chauhan
Hon'ble Vivek Chaudhary,J. Hon'ble Om Prakash Shukla,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents.
Learned counsel for the petitioner states that his client is no more in his contact and he has no instructions in the matter.
Learned counsel for respondent No.4 states that the petitioner is also not complying with the terms settled before the mediation centre.
In view thereof, the petition is dismissed for want of instructions.
Interim order, if any, stands discharges.
Order Date :- 23.10.2024 Reena/-
(Om Prakash Shukla,J.) (Vivek Chaudhary,J.)
Digitally signed by :- REENA KANNAUJIYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench
Saurabh Rousha
State Of Up Thru.Addl.Chief Secy.Dept Of Home
Vivek Chaudhary
Om Prakash Shukla
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
