Dismissed
Miyush Garg v. State & Anr.
Delhi HCCRL.M.C./2469/2021
Case brief
AI extract
What is this about?
Petition under Crl.M.C. dismissed in default as neither the petitioner nor counsel appeared on four consecutive hearing dates.
What the court decided
AI extract
¶1
$~28
¶2
- IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
¶3
- CRL.M.C. 2469/2021 & Crl.M.A. 16209/2021 MIYUSH GARG .....Petitioner Through: None.
¶4
Versus STATE & ANR. .....Respondent Through: Mr. Utkarsh, Additional Public Prosecutor for Respondent-State Mr. Krishan Kumar, Mr. S.K. Garg & Mr. Nitin Pal, Advocates for Respondent No.2
¶5
CORAM:
¶6
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA
¶7
O R D E R % 13.05.2025
¶8
- None has appeared on behalf of the Petitioner today. Similar was the position on last three dates of hearing.
¶9
- The present Petition and pending Applications are accordingly dismissed in default.
¶10
NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA, J
¶11
MAY 13, 2025
Parties & counsel
AI extract
- petitioner
Miyush Garg
- respondent
State
- respondent
Respondent No.2
Coram
AI extract
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court