Dismissed¶22

Chandan Goswami v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC16 Oct 2024W.P.(Cr.)/172/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Jharkhand High Court, Ranchi; W.P. (Cr.) (DB) (H.B) No.172 of 2024 (order dated 16-10-2024); petitioner Chandan Goswami; respondents include State of Jharkhand, Superintendent of Police Seraikella, Saroj Mishra, Dolly Mishra @ Dolly Goswami, Anushka/Aradhya/Rudransu Goswami; bench Sujit Narayan Prasad and Navneet Kumar, JJ; advocates Rajesh Kumar Mishra (petitioner), Dipankar APP (State); defect ignored; heard on merit with consent; dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to pursue statutory remedy; no merits decided, no statutes or cases cited.

What did the court decide?

Liberty to the petitioner to avail statutory remedy for redressal of grievance. ¶22

Chandan Goswami Vs the State of Jharkhand — Jharkhand HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P. (Cr.) (DB) (H.B) No.172 of 2024

¶2

¶3

Chandan Goswami, son of Late Nitya Gopal Goswami aged about 55 years resident of village- Subhash Colony, P.O. – Gamharia, P.S. – Adityapur, Distt. Seraikella-Kharsawan .. ... Petitioner

¶4

Versus

¶5

The State of Jharkhand

¶6

The Superintendent of Police Seraikella at + P.O. +P.S.+ Distt.Seraikella

¶7

Saroj Mishra wife of Late Dayalu Mishra aged about 50 years 4. Dolly Mishra @ Dolly Goswami wife of Late Devbrat Goswami, aged about 35 years

¶8

Anushka Goswami Daughter of Late Devbrat Goswami aged about 12 years

¶9

Aradhya Goswami Daughter of Late Devbrat Goswami aged about 7 years

¶10

Rudransu Goswami Daughter of Late Devbrat Goswami, aged about 3 years, Respondent No.3 to 7 resident of villagePanikapara, P.O. – Khalrajpur, P.S. – Khalrajpur, Distt. Sambalpur (Odissa) At present resident of village- Bhojpur colony, M.P. Tower, P.O. – Chhota Gamharia, P.S. – Gamharia, Distt. – Seraikella- Kharsawan (Jharkhand).

¶11

… … Respondents

¶12

¶13

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVNEET KUMAR

¶14

-------For the Petitioner : Mr. Rajesh Kumar Mishra, Advocate For the State : Mr. Dipankar, APP -------- Order No. 07/ Dated: 16^th October, 2024

¶15

This matter has been listed under the heading ‘Orders (with

¶16

defect)’.

¶17

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has prayed to ignore the defect.

¶18

We have considered the nature of defect. Considering the relevant copy, considering the nature, the defect is ignored.

¶19

The matter has been heard on merit with the consent of the parties.

¶20

After some argument, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner seeks leave of this Court to withdraw this writ petition with liberty to avail the statutory remedy available.

¶21

There is no opposition on behalf of learned APP appearing for the State.

¶22

Considering the prayer made on behalf of learned counsel for the petitioner, the instant writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to the petitioner to avail statutory remedy for redressal of grievance.

¶23

(Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.)

¶24

(Navneet Kumar, J.)

¶25

Basant/S.Das

¶26

2 W.P. (Cr.) (DB) (H.B) No.172 of 2024

Chandan Goswami v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chandan Goswami v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Prabhakar Kumar Alias Dr Prabhakar Kumar Vs the State of Jharkhand

Adesh Ganjhu Alias Mangra Vs the State of Jharkhand

Anischay Ganjhu Vs the National Investigating Agency, New Delhi

Charka Hembram Alias Charka Marandi Alias Kallu Vs the State of Jharkhand

Manoj Kumar Agarwalla Vs Fertilizer Corporation of India through Its General Manager

Mukesh Kumar Yadav Vs the State of Jharkhand