Revision application withdrew due to death of petitioner. Application dismissed as not pressed. Connected applications and interim orders disposed of.
Revision application dismissed as not pressed. Interim order vacated. Pending connected applications disposed of.
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.
D/L41 C.R.R.721 of 2007 July 18, 2022 In Re: An application under Section 401 read with Section 482 of Code Bpg. of Criminal Procedure, 1973;
Lakshman Saha Versus Samir Mukhapadhyay
Ms. Priyanka Sarkar.
…for the petitioner.
Mr. Anwar Hossain, Ms. Manisha Sharma.
…for the State.
Learned advocate appearing for the petitioner do not intend to pursue with the present revisional application as it has been informed that during the pendency of the revisional application, the petitioner has expired.
As none appears on behalf of the State, Ms. Manisha Sharma, learned advocate, who ordinarily appears on behalf of the State, is directed to represent the State. Her appointment may be regularised by the concerned authorities.
In view of the submissions advanced, CRR 721 of 2007 is dismissed as not pressed.
Pending connected applications, if any, are consequently disposed of.
Interim order, if any, is hereby vacated.
All parties shall act on the server copy of this order duly downloaded from the official website of this Court.
(Tirthankar Ghosh, J.)
2
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Lakshman Saha
State
Tirthankar Ghosh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
