Allowed

Sanjay Rajoria v. The State Of Jharkhand Through Labour Enforecemnt Officer Central Hazaribagh

Jharkhand HC15 Apr 2014Cr.M.P./194/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner challenged an order rejecting his prayer for dispensation of personal appearance under Section 205 CrPC. The court set aside the impugned order and dispensed with appearance, subject to conditions.

What did the court decide?

The order dated 21.12.2013 setting aside Section 205 CrPC prayer was quashed, and personal appearance was dispensed with subject to conditions.

Sanjay Rajoria Vs The State Of Jharkhand Through… — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Jharkhand HC (2014)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND, RANCHI

¶2

Cr. M. P. No. 194 of 2014

Sanjay Rajoria

Petitioner(s)

Versus

1.The State of Jharkhand through

¶7

Labour Enforcement Officer [Central], Hazaribagh

¶8

Labour Enforcement Officer [Central], Hazaribagh…. Opp. Party(s)

¶9

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE R. R. PRASAD

¶10

For the Petitioner(s)	: Ajay	M/s Indrajit Sinha Kr. Sah, Arpan Mishra, Advocates.
For the State	:	A.P.P.
For the O.P. No.2	:	Mr. Prabhash Kumar, Advocate.
	-----

¶11

03 /15.04.2014. Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned

¶12

counsel appearing for the Opp. Party No.2 as well as learned counsel appearing for the State.

¶13

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that this petition has been filed for quashing of the order dated 21.12.2013 passed in G [LEO] Case No.115 of 2013 [T.R. No.3336 of 2013] whereby and whereunder prayer made under Section 205 Cr.P.C. for dispensation of the personal appearance was rejected.

¶14

keeping in view the nature of allegation which is petty in nature and also the statement made on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner happens to be the General Manager, West Bokaro Colliery of M/s Tata Steel Ltd., the court seems to have committed illegality in disallowing the application filed under Section 205 Cr.P.C. and thereby, the order dated 21.12.2013 is hereby, set aside.

¶15

Consequently, the personal appearance of the petitioner is dispensed with, subject to condition that the petitioner would not dispute the identity of the witnesses and would appear as and when he is directed to appear by the court.

¶16

In the result, this petition stands allowed.

¶17

Let a copy of this order be communicated through “FAX” at the

¶18

cost of the petitioner.

¶19

(R. R. Prasad, J.)

¶20

Sandeep/

Sanjay Rajoria v. The State Of Jharkhand Through Labour Enforecemnt Officer Central Hazaribagh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sanjay Rajoria v. The State Of Jharkhand Through Labour Enforecemnt Officer Central Hazaribagh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

B.R.Prasad Bangalore Ram Prasad Vs State of Jharkhand through CBI

Nand Kishore Fogla Vs State Of Jharkhand Through Cbi

Bhimsen Pradhan Alias Bikram Pradhan Vs The State Of Jharkhand

Binodanand Singh Alias Binod Kumar Singh Vs The State Of Jharkhand And Anr.

Raju Singh Vs The State Of Jharkhand

Rakesh Kumar and Anr. Vs The State Of Jharkhand

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

B.R.Prasad  Bangalore Ram Prasad Vs State of Jharkhand through CBI

Nand Kishore Fogla Vs State Of Jharkhand Through Cbi

Bhimsen Pradhan Alias Bikram Pradhan Vs The State Of Jharkhand

Binodanand Singh Alias Binod Kumar Singh Vs The State Of Jharkhand And Anr.

Raju Singh Vs The State Of Jharkhand

Rakesh Kumar and Anr. Vs The State Of Jharkhand

B.R.Prasad Bangalore Ram Prasad Vs State of Jharkhand through CBI