Sandeep Kumar @ Sandeep Kumar Viskarma v. The State of Jharkhand
Case at a glance
Outcome
Allowed
This criminal miscellaneous petition is allowed accordingly
Provisions considered
Judgment
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP KUMAR SRIVASTAVA ----- For the Petitioner : Mr. Azad Shekhar, Advocate For the State : Mr. Sunil Kumar Dubey, A.P.P. Order No.05/ Dated:22.03.2024 ….. This criminal miscellaneous petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. by the petitioner with a prayer for modification of the order dated 30.11.2022 passed in A.B.A. No. 8637 of 2022. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that vide order dated
Operative part
30.11.2022 passed in A.B.A. No. 8637 of 2022, the petitioner was directed to file requisites etc. for issuance of notice to the O.P. No.2 within one week and the conducting advocate instructed his clerk on 30.11.2022 itself to file requisites for notice. It is submitted that advertently the clerk filed the notice in another case. Hence, instead of filing the requisites for notice in the connected A.B.A. the requisites were filed in Cr.A.(S.J.) No. 01 of 2022. Hence, the petitioner prays for further three days time to comply the direction given by the Hon’ble Court. Considering the aforesaid submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners, three weeks’ time is granted to the learned counsel for the petitioner for filing requisites for issuance of notice. Accordingly, order dated 30.11.2022 passed in A.B.A. No. 8637 of 2022 is modified to that extent. This criminal miscellaneous petition is allowed accordingly. R.K/ (Pradeep Kumar Srivastava, J.)
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: This criminal miscellaneous petition is allowed accordingly
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.