Criminal Revision No. 1394 of 2018 was dismissed for default as the petitioner failed to appear despite multiple notices, while the public prosecutor and one opponent were present.
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 Revision No. 1394 of 2018
Batasi Devi
..… Petitioner
Versus
….. Opp. Parties
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRASAD
For the Petitioner : None For the State : Mrs. Nehala Sharmin, A.P.P. For O.P. No. 2 : Mr. Ayush Kumar Verma, Advocate
09/14.08.2023 None appears on behalf of the petitioner, however, learned counsel for Opposite Party No. 2 is present.
2. It appears that on 24.06.2023, 17.07.2023, 08.08.2023 and even today, i.e. on 14.08.2023 none had appeared on behalf of the petitioner.
3. Learned A.P.P. is present.
4. Under the circumstances, This Criminal Revision No. 1394 of 2018 is dismissed for default.
(Sanjay Prasad, J.)
s.m.
Batasi Devi
The State of Jharkhand
Mahabir Mahato
Sanjay Prasad
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
