The criminal petition was dismissed because the petitioners' counsel was absent and there was no representation, indicating lack of interest in pursuing the matter.
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.
HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SAMUDRALA GOVINDARAJULU
CRIMINAL PETITION N o.4242 of 2009
Date: February 07, 2011
Between:
1. Yerukala Mallesh & another. … Petitioners
and
1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by Public Prosecutor, High Court of A.P, and another. … Respondents
HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SAMUDRALA GOVINDARAJULU
CRIMINAL PETITION N o.4242 of 2009
ORDER:
The petitioners’ counsel is absent today also in spite of listing the matter under the caption of “for dismissal”. There is no representation. It appears that the petitioners are not interested in pursuing the matter.
Hence, the criminal petition is dismissed.
___________________________________ SAMUDRALA GOVINDARAJULU, J
Date: February 07, 2011. BSB
Yerukala Mallesh
The State of Andhra Pradesh
SAMUDRALA GOVINDARAJULU
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
