The High Court dismissed an application for cancellation of bail under CrPC Section 439(2) because the petitioner failed to appear despite notice.
Application for cancellation of bail dismissed for default due to non-appearance of petitioner.
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.
16.07.2021 Court No.30 Item No.32 Krishnendu Dismissed
CRM 997 of 2018 (Via video Conference)
In Re:- An application under section 439 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure; And In Re: Manirul Tarafdar Petitioner Mr. N. P. Agarwala, Mr. Pratick Bose
For the State
No one appears on behalf of the petitioner and no accommodation has been sought for though Mr. Agarwala, learned advocate appearing for the State, is present.
In view thereof, the application for cancellation of bail, being CRM 997 of 2018, is dismissed for default.
(Suvra Ghosh, J.) (Tapabrata Chakraborty, J.)
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the application for cancellation of bail should be decided when no petitioner appeared.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
State
Manirul Tarafdar
Suvra Ghosh
Tapabrata Chakraborty
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
