Dismissed
Jitendra Meena v. the State through C B I
Jharkhand HCCr.M.P./2147/2018
Case brief
from the order text
What is this about?
COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr. M.P. No.…
What the court decided
AI extract
COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr. M.P. No.…
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
Cr. M.P. No. 2147 of 2018
Jitendra Meena, S/o Ramdhan Meena, aged about 34 years, Sub Inspector, RPF, Muri, R/o. Ulupura, P.O. – Kamalpura, P.S. Bhusawar, District – Bharatpur, Rajasthan
Versus … The State through C.B.I … Opposite Party
CORAM: HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY
--For the Petitioner : Mr. Sadish Ujwal Beck, Advocate For the State : Mr. Rohit Sinha, Advocate ---
06/20.01.2020 This petition has been filed for the following relief:
“For quashing the First Information Report & entire criminal case registered as being R.C 11 (A)/2017-R dated 02.12.2017, instituted for the alleged offence under Sections 7 & 8 of the P.C Act, 1988 which is pending before the learned Special Judge, CBI, Ranchi in R.C. 11 (A)/2017-R.”
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner Mr. Sadish Ujwal Beck, under the instructions of arguing counsel Mr. Sunil Singh, submits that the trial has already been commenced in this case and accordingly, he seeks permission to withdraw this petition with a liberty to raise all the points which have been raised in the present petition as well as any other points that may be available to the petitioner before the learned court below at appropriate stage. He submits that withdrawal of this case may not prejudice the case of the petitioner before the learned court below.
3. Learned counsel for the Central Bureau of Investigation, has no objection to the prayer made.
4. Considering the submissions made, this petition is dismissed as withdrawn with a liberty to the petitioner to raise all the points which have been raised in the present petition as well as any other points, which may be available to the petitioner under law. It is made clear that withdrawal of this
2
petition will not prejudice the case of either parties in any manner whatsoever.
5. Pending interlocutory applications, if any, are dismissed as not pressed.
6. Let this order be communicated to the learned court below through ‘FAX’.
(Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.)
Saurav/
Jitendra Meena
The State through C.B.I
Anubha Rawat Choudhary
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court