Vinod Kumar v. State of Uttarakhand
Case brief
What is this about?
An application for bail was dismissed for want of prosecution as no appearance was made by the applicant even in the revised list.
An application for bail was dismissed for want of prosecution as no appearance was made by the applicant even in the revised list.
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.
| SL. No |
Date | Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures |
COURT’S OR JUDGES’S ORDERS BA1 No. 1046 of 2019 Hon’ble N.S. Dhanik, J. None appears for the applicant even in the revised list. Mrs. Mamta Joshi, learned Brief Holder for the State. The present bail application is dismissed for want of prosecution. |
|---|---|---|---|
| (N.S. Dhanik, J.) 02.08.2021 AK |
Applicant
State
N.S. Dhanik
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court