Patna High CourtCR. MISC./14267/2013allowed

Mr. Arvind Uppal, Managing Director, Whirlpool Of India Ltd. v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2019-01-25Mr. Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No. 14267 of 2013 Arising Out of Complaint Case No.-1241 (C-2) Year-2010 Thana- PATNA COMPLAINT CASE District- Patna ====================================================== Mr. Arvind Uppal, Managing Director, Whirlpool of India Ltd. Having his Office at Plot No.-40, Sector -44, Gurgaon (Haryana). ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar

2. The Labour Enforcement Officer (Central), Mourya Lok Complex, 2nd Floor, A Block, Room No.6 And 16, Patna Bihar.

3. The Union of India Ministry of Labour and Employment, Shram Shakti Bhawan, Rafi Marg, New Delhi-110001.

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Raju Giri and Mr. Avanish Kumar Singh, Advocates For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Ansuman Singh, C.G.C.

For the State :

Mr. Jharkhandi Upadhyay, A.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 25-01-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner; learned A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel for the Union of India.

2. The petitioner has moved the Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for the following relief:

"That this application is directed against the order dated 10.01.2013, passed by Sri. Amit Raj, J.M. 1st Class, Patna, in Complaint Case No. 1241 (C-2)/ 2010, whereby, the learned J.M. has rejected the prayer of the petitioner filed under section 205 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, to dispense with his personal attendance."

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.14267 of 2013 dt.25-01-2019 2/2

3. At the very outset, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that in view of the order passed today in Cr. Misc. No. 15011 of 2013, which was filed by the present petitioner and two others, the Court has quashed the entire proceeding arising out of Complaint Case No. 1241(C-2) of 2010, including the order taking cognizance dated 29.09.2010, and, thus, the present case has become infructuous.

4. Learned counsel for the opposite parties do not dispute the position.

5. In view thereof, the application stands disposed off. (Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J.) P. Kumar AFR/NAFR U T