Revisional application dismissed as not pressed by the petitioner's counsel due to the death of the sole accused.
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.
(via Video conference)
06 15.12.2020 CRR 988 of 2020 Dd
In the matter of : Indranil Mukherjee …..Petitioner
Mr. Ayan Bhattacharya Mr. Sharequl Haque
…. ….for the petitioner
Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the sole accused in this case has passed away in the meantime. He submits that his client, the de facto complainant in this case, would not like to press this application and, instead, would like to file an appropriate application before the learned trial court.
Accordingly, the revisional application is dismissed as not pressed.
Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be given to the parties on usual undertaking.
(Jay Sengupta, J.)
Indranil Mukherjee
Jay Sengupta
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
