Court dismissed two interlocutory applications seeking restoration of a non-prosecuted revision petition and stay of arrest warrant due to petitioner's failure to comply with deposit directions and repeated absences.
Both interlocutory applications were dismissed for non-prosecution and earlier 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.
Page No.# 1/3
GAHC010065062019
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : I.A.(Crl.) 240/2019
1:RABINDRA DAS
S/O LATE AKAN DAS, R/O AMBANIHATI, P.O. BARPETA TOWN, P.S. BARPETA, DIST. BARPETA, ASSAM.
VERSUS
1:THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
2:UDAY CH. MAZUMDAR S/O LATE NARAYAN MAZUMDAR R/O VILL. BAMUNBARI P.S. SARTHEBARI DIST. BARPETA ASSAM
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR B N SARMA
Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM
Linked Case : Crl.Rev.P. 130/2018
1:RABENDRA DAS S/O- SRI AKAN CH. DAS R/O- AMBARHATI P.O- BARPETA TOWN P.S- BARPETA DIST- BARPETA ASSAM VERSUS
1:THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR REP. BY THE PP
Page No.# 2/3
ASSAM
2:UDAY CH MAZUMDAR S/O- LATE NARAYAN MAZUMDAR R/O- VILL- BAMUNBARI MOUZA- SARUKHETRI P.S- SARTHEBARI DIST- BARPETA ASSAM
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR B N SARMA Advocate for the Respondent : PP ASSAM
Linked Case : I.A.(Crl.) 449/2019
1:RABINDRA DAS S/O LATE AKAN DAS R/O AMBANIHATI P.O. BARPETA TOWN P.S. BARPETA DIST. BARPETA ASSAM. VERSUS 1:THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR REPRESENTED BY THE PP ASSAM. 2:UDAY CH. MAZUMDAR S/O LATE NARAYAN MAZUMDAR R/O VILL. BAMUNBARI P.S. SARTHEBARI DIST. BARPETA ASSAM.
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR B N SARMA Advocate for the Respondent : PP ASSAM
BEFORE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE RUMI KUMARI PHUKAN
O R D E R
Page No.# 3/3
01-08-2019.
The applicant of both the Interlocutory Applications is not present before this Court, despite repeated call. The learned counsel for the respondent No.2, Mr. J. Deka is present.
The case of the revision petitioner was admitted by the order dated 29.11.2018, subject to payment of Rs.2,00,000/- before the Registry but due to inability of the petitioner to deposit the aforesaid amount and non-complying the Court order, the petition was dismissed for non-prosecution on 20.02.2019, in Crl. Revision Petition No.130/2018.
Subsequent thereto, the petitioner come forward with the present two Interlocutory Applications, with two folds prayer : (i) that the Crl. Revision Petition No.130/2018 may be restored and (ii) that the warrant of arrest issued against the petitioner by the trial Court may be stayed.
This Court again provided an opportunity to the petitioner to make his submission and issue notice to the respondent side. Accordingly the learned counsel for the respondent No.2 has entered his appearance before this Court and made a submission that still yet, no any amount has been deposited either before the trial Court or before the Registry of this Court and there is no communication in this regard. The record also reveals that no such amount has been deposited before the Registry.
On earlier occasion, this Court directed the petitioner while entertaining the I.A. (Crl.) No.449/2019, vide order dated 04.06.2019, to deposit a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- before the Court of learned Addl. CJM, Barpeta by means of demand draft drawn in favour of the complainant, with further direction to list the matter again on 14.06.2019. The record reveals that on the next date i.e. on 18.06.2019, the petitioner again took time for complying the Court’s order and to deposit the amount as directed. This Court again granted further time as prayed for but on the subsequent dates i.e. 26.06.2019,15.07.2019 and today again the petitioners chose to remain absent, which indicate his inaction/ inability to comply the order.
In view of the above, nothing remains in these two Interlocutory Applications. Accordingly both Interlocutory Applications are dismissed for non-prosecution.
Earlier interim order also stands vacated.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
Rabindra Das
State of Assam
Uday Ch. Mazumdar
Rumi Kumari Phukan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
