Dismissed

Union of India through Public Prosecutor Spe CBI Dhanbad v. Sri Promod Kumar Singh

Jharkhand HC6 Sept 2019Cr.M.P./924/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order directs the restoration of Acquittal Appeal No.36 of 2017 to its original file. The High Court accepted the petitioner's submission that the dismissal was due to an inadvertent mistake and non-deliberate non-compliance, and listed the appeal for filing within a week.

What did the court decide?

Acquittal Appeal No.36 of 2017 directed to be restored to its original file and listed for further proceedings after a week.

Union of India through Public Prosecutor Spe CBI… — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Jharkhand HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr. M.P. No.924 of 2019

¶2

Union of India through Public Prosecutor SPE/CBI at P.O., P.S. & Dist. Dhanbad, Dhanbad … Petitioners Versus

¶3

… Sri Pramod Kumar Singh Opposite Party ------

¶4

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioners : Mr. Rajiv Prasad, Advocate For the Opposite Party : None ------

¶5

Order No.06 Dated- 06.09.2019

¶6

This criminal miscellaneous petition has been filed by the petitioner with a prayer for restoration of Acquittal Appeal No.36 of 2017 to its original file which stood dismissed for default for non-compliance of the peremptory order dated 17.01.2019 for removing the defects.

¶7

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that inadvertently the counsel for the appellant could not inform the appellant for taking steps for removing the defect pointed out in the further stamp reporting that I.A. for special leave to appeal could not be filed within time on account of the mistake on the part of the appellant, hence, the defect could not be removed. It is then submitted that the said petition for special leave to appeal has been filed in the meanwhile. It is then submitted that the petitioner has very good grounds to agitate in the said Acquittal Appeal No.36 of 2017 and non-compliance of the said order was neither deliberate nor intentional and unless the same is restored to its original file, the petitioner will be highly prejudiced. Hence, it is submitted that the Acquittal Appeal No.36 of 2017 be restored to its original file.

¶8

Though notice was issued to the opposite party No.2 yet no one appears on behalf of the opposite party No.2.

¶9

Considering the aforesaid submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner, Acquittal Appeal No.36 of 2017 is directed to be restored to its original file.

¶10

Registry is directed to list Acquittal Appeal No.36 of 2017 under the appropriate heading after a week.

¶11

This criminal miscellaneous petition is disposed of accordingly.

¶12

(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J . )

¶13

Animesh/

Union of India through Public Prosecutor Spe CBI Dhanbad v. Sri Promod Kumar Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union of India through Public Prosecutor Spe CBI Dhanbad v. Sri Promod Kumar Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

MD Alimuddin Vs the State of Jharkhand

Dhaneshwar Sharma Alias Dhaneshwar Mistri Vs the State of Jharkhand

Sanajay Kumar Yadav Alias Sanjay Yadav Vs the State of Jharkhand

Smt B Bharti Devi Alias Bharti Devi Vs the State of Jharkhand And Anr.

Basudev Das Alias Basudeo Ravidas Vs the State of Jharkhand

Pitambar Singh Alias Pitamber Singh Vs the State of Jharkhand