The court dismissed the application for cancellation of bail for want of prosecution as the petitioner failed to appear despite previous adjournments and office objections remained unresolved.
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 MISCELLANEOUS No.5637 of 2022
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-95 Year-2020 Thana- ARWAL District- Jehanabad
======================================================
Arbind Kumar S/o Shri Jagdish Yadav, R/o village- Khankulipur, P.S.- Arwal, District- Arwal
... ... Opposite Party/s
====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : None For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Uday Chand Prasad, A.P.P. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL DUTTA MISHRA ORAL ORDER
the matter, however, learned A.P.P. for the State is present.
one turned up on behalf of the petitioner and the matter was adjourned.
(Sunil Dutta Mishra, J)
Ritik/-
U T
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioner has lost interest in pursuing the application for cancellation of bail?
Arbind Kumar
The State of Bihar
Nitya Nand @ Nityanand Singh
Sunil Dutta Mishra
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
