Single-judge revision dismissed for default as the respondent/petitioner failed to appear despite multiple reminders regarding an order under Section 144 CrPC.
Revision dismissed for default; connected applications disposed of; 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.
21.06.2023 Serial no.7 Aloke Ct. No. 30
CRR 986 of 2019
Mohan Chandra Maji Vs. The State of West Bengal & Ors.
Ms. Puspita Saha
… for the State
The present revision is of the year 2019 is against the order dated 29.01.2019 passed by the learned Executive Magistrate, Tamluk, Purba Medinipur, in M.P. Case No. 50 of 2019 under Section 144(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
Ms. Puspita Saha, learned counsel for the State present in Court is appointed to represent the State in this case. Let her appointment be regularized.
As none appears for the petitioner in spite of repeated calls since the date of listing, the revisional application stands dismissed for default.
All connected application, if any, stands disposed of.
Interim order, if any, stands vacated.
Let a copy of the order be sent to the learned trial court for compliance and to proceed with the trial in accordance with law.
Learned counsel for the State to inform the status of this case to the concerned authority.
(Shampa Dutt (Paul), J.)
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Mohan Chandra Maji
The State of West Bengal
Shampa Dutt (Paul)
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
