In a criminal writ jurisdiction case arising from a vigilance case, the learned counsel for the petitioner sought to withdraw the application, stating that the matter had become infructuous. The court dismissed the application as withdrawn.
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 Criminal Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 190 of 2017
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-24 Year-2014 Thana- VIGILANCE District- Patna
======================================================
Nand Kishor Singh son of Late Awadh Bihari Singh, resident of VillageSinghra, P.S.- Konch, District- Gaya.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Pratap Sharma, Advocate For the Vigilance : Mr. Rana Vikram Singh, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY ORAL ORDER
This application is dismissed as withdrawn.
(Partha Sarthy, J)
Spd/-
U T
Nand Kishor Singh
State Of Bihar Through Vigilance Department
Director General of Police, Vigilance Investigation Bureau
Superintendent-cum-SHO, Vigilance
Md. Jamimuddin
Ram Pravesh Sigh
Parta Sarthy
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
