The High Court dismissed a Criminal Miscellaneous Application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. filed by Smt. Muneshi Devi for want of prosecution as the applicant failed to appear despite multiple calls.
The Criminal Misc. Application No. 831 of 2010 was dismissed for want of 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.
C-482 No. 831 of 2010
Hon’ble U.C. Dhyani, J.
None present for the applicant, even in the second revised call.
Mr. P.S. Saun, AGA present for respondent no. 1.
Mr. P.C. Petshali, Advocate holding brief of Mr. L.K. Tiwari, Advocate present for respondent no. 2.
None present for respondents no. 3 and 4.
Mr. P.C. Petashali, Advocate drew attention of the Court towards the judgment dated 11th July 2011, rendered by this Court in Criminal Misc. Application (C-482) No. 598 of 2011, Smt. Muneshi Devi vs. State of Uttarakhand and others, and submitted that the petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. filed by Smt. Muneshi Devi was dismissed. The C-482 petition no. 598 of 2011 was aimed to quash the order dated 21.05.2010 impugned in present C-482 petition.
Since none is present on behalf of the applicant therefore Criminal Misc. Application No. 831 of 2010, moved under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. is dismissed for want of prosecution.
(U.C. Dhyani, J.) 02.04.2013
HN
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the Criminal Misc. Application filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. should be allowed in the absence of the applicant.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Muneshi Devi
State of Uttarakhand
U.C. Dhyani
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
