Petitioner challenged an FIR but sought and obtained permission to withdraw the petition with liberty to accord grounds later. The petition was dismissed as withdrawn.
Petition dismissed as withdrawn; pending interlocutory application dismissed.
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. 349 of 2016
Kailash Kumar Roy, son of Late Chunchun Roy, resident of A-Type, Quarter No.37, P.B. Project Colony, P.O. Kusunda, P.S. Putaki, DistrictDhanbad … Petitioner
-Versus-
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI
For the Petitioner : Mr. Niranjan Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party-State : Mr. Bishwambhar Shastri, A.P.P. For Opposite Party No.2 : Mr. Soumitra Baroi, Advocate
This petition has been taken through Video Conferencing in view of the guidelines of the High Court taking into account the situation arising due to COVID-19 pandemic. None of the parties have complained about any technical snag of audio-video and with their consent this matter has been heard.
After some arguments, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that charge-sheet has been submitted and cognizance has been taken in the matter.
In this case, only FIR is under challenge.
In view of subsequent development, learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission to withdraw this petition with liberty to take all the grounds at appropriate stage.
Accordingly, this petition stands dismissed as withdrawn.
Pending interlocutory application, if any, also stands dismissed.
(Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.)
Ajay/
Kailash Kumar Roy
The State of Jharkhand
Raj Kumar Paswan
Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
