The Special Bench of the High Court at Patna dismissed a writ application for non-prosecution as no one appeared on behalf of the petitioners, while learned counsel for the State was 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 JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.3180 of 1993
======================================================
Sri Nagina Bhagat & Ors
.... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
State & Ors
.... .... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : None
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Pratik Kr. Sinha, AC to GA XII
.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHAKRADHARI
SHARAN SINGH
ORAL ORDER
7 07-04-2015 No one appears on behalf of the petitioners.
Learned counsel for the State is present.
This writ application is, accordingly, dismissed for
non prosecution.
(Chakradhari Sharan Singh, J)
BKS/-
U
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the writ application should be dismissed for non-prosecution due to absence of petitioner's counsel.
Sri Nagina Bhagat & Ors
State & Ors
CHAKRADHARI SHARAN SINGH
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
