The High Court dismissed an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for want of prosecution, noting that the applicants and their counsel failed to appear during mediation or for the hearing on the date set.
Application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. dismissed; interim order, if any, vacated.
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. 1248 of 2014
U.C. Dhyani, J.
None is present for the applicants. Mr. S.S. Adhikari, Brief Holder for the respondent State.
Mr. Abhishek Verma, Advocate for the private respondent.
The matter was referred for mediation, but it is quite surprising that neither the applicants nor their counsel could appear before the Mediator even.
None appeared for the applicants today also.
Application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is dismissed for want of prosecution. Interim order, if any, stands vacated.
(U.C. Dhyani, J.) 23.04.2015
HN
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the matter before the court should be dismissed for want of prosecution due to non-appearance by applicants.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
applicants
respondent State
private respondent
U.C. Dhyani
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
