Petition challenging a cognizance order dismissed. Court held no relief could be extended due to no stay being granted earlier and bail bond cancellation in 2017.
None granted. Bail bond was cancelled earlier; no stay order existed. Petition stands 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. 607 of 2016
-Versus-
The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI
For the Petitioners : Mr. Jai Shankar Tripathi, Advocate For the Opposite Party-State : Mr. Santosh Kumar Shukla, A.P.P. -----
06/22.02.2022. Heard Mr. Jai Shankar Tripathi, learned counsel for the petitioners and
Mr. Santosh Kumar Shukla, learned A.P.P. for the State.
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.
Status report is on the record, which is dated 19.08.2017, in which, it has been disclosed that no step was being taken by the accused and that is why the bail bond has been cancelled. This has happened in the year 2017 itself. Only the cognizance order is under challenge in this petition. There is no stay granted earlier.
In view of subsequent development, no relief can be extended to the petitioners. Accordingly, this petition stands dismissed.
(Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.)
Ajay/
Fazlay Noor Khan
Guddu Alam
Julakha Khatoon
The State of Jharkhand
Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
