Writ petition was dismissed as withdrawn by counsel on the ground of lack of instructions from the client. Petitioner's counsel sought to remove defects from the case which were thereafter ignored.
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
W.P. (PIL) No. 617 of 2022
Vikash Kumar ... ... ... ... ... ... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand and others …
… ... Respondents
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR RAI
For the Petitioner: Mr. Krishna Shankar, Advocate For the Respondents: Mr. Sharad Kaushal, A.C. to A.A.G.-III
06/Dated: 19th March, 2024
Mr. Krishna Shankar, learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that he has got not instruction from his client and as such, he intends to withdraw this writ petition. He further submits that since the writ petition is being withdrawn, the issue relating to removal of defects may be exonerated.
Learned counsel for the respondents-State does not have any objection to the aforesaid prayer.
Accordingly, the defects pointed out by the Office are ignored and the writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn.
(Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.)
(Arun Kumar Rai, J.)
Manoj/-
Vikash Kumar
The State of Jharkhand
Sujit Narayan Prasad
Arun Kumar Rai
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
