The High Court at Nagpur dismissed a criminal revision application for want of prosecution as the sole legal representative failed to appear after a fresh notice was issued.
Application dismissed for want of prosecution and interim order vacated.
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.
1 revn3.11.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, NAGPUR BENCH, AT NAGPUR
CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO.3 OF 2011
(Santosh s/o Hansaraj Yadav ..vs.. Sau. Sheetal w/o Santosh Yadav and another)
CORAM : M.L.TAHALIYANI, J. DATED : 16-10-2012.
None for the applicant.
Learned Counsel Mr. A.R. Wagh for the nonapplicants is present.
Learned Counsel Mr. P.S. Sahare for the applicant has withdrawn his Vakalatnama. He was permitted to withdraw his Vakalatnama by order dated 19th June 2012. Thereafter a fresh notice has been issued to the applicant. The applicant has been served with the fresh notice. He opted to remain absent in spite of service of fresh notice. In the circumstances, he does not appear to be interested in prosecuting the present application.
In the circumstances, the application stands dismissed for want of prosecution.
Interim order, if any, stands vacated.
JUDGE
pma
Santosh s/o Hansaraj Yadav
M.L. Tahaliyani
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
