Single judge dismissed an application challenging an order of taking cognizance as infructuous since the underlying complaint case was already disposed of earlier.
Application dismissed as infructuous.
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Criminal Miscellaneous Petition No. 546 of 2010
Dhananjay Singh son of Anchit Singh resident of village Mehandi Nagar, PO & PS Hussainabad, District Palamau
… … Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand … … Opposite Party
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY
For the Petitioner : None For the Opposite Party : None
4/01.09.2016 It appears from the status report that complaint case no. C- 708 of 2008 has already been disposed of on 19.07.2013. The petitioner in this case who is the complainant has preferred this application in which he has challenged the order taking cognizance as the offence punishable under Sections 307/326 of I.P.C. was never included in the said order.
However, in view of the fact that the complaint case has already been disposed of, this application is dismissed as being infructuous.
(Rongon Mukhopadhyay, J)
R. Shekhar Cp3
1 issue framed by the court
Whether an application challenging the order of taking cognizance is maintainable when the preceding complaint case has already been disposed of.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Dhananjay Singh
The State of Jharkhand
Rongon Mukhopadhyay
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
