The High Court dismissed a criminal miscellaneous petition for non-prosecution as the petitioner's counsel was absent and the court inferred a loss of interest in the matter.
The petition was dismissed for non-prosecution.
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.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Criminal Misccellaneous (Petition) No. 3336 / 2014
Mala Ram Son of Shri Chhitar Mal, by Caste Khatik, R/o Village Kotri, P.S. Roopangarh, District Ajmer (rajasthan)
----Petitioner
Versus
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : None Present.
For Respondent(s) : Mr. R.S. Shekhawat, PP.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.R. MOOLCHANDANI
Judgment
08/01/2018
Learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned counsel for respondent no. 2 are not present.
Learned Public Prosecutor is present. Present petition was preferred way back in the year 2014 against the order passed by Additional District and Sessions Judge No. 1, Kishangarh, Ajmer, on 07.02.2014 in case no. 43/2010 but none is present for the petitioner. Absence of learned counsel for the petitioner suggests that petitioner has since lost interest in prosecuting the present petition. Hence the instant petition is dismissed for nonprosecution.
(G.R. MOOLCHANDANI) J.
(2 of 2)
[CRLMP-3336/2014]
Ashu/11
Mala Ram
State of Rajasthan Through P.P.
Sushila
G.R. Moolchandani
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
