Patna High CourtCR. MISC./7474/2021dismissed

Sushil Tiwari v. The State Of Bihar

2021-08-18Mr. Justice Vikash Jain2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.7474 of 2021 In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.9051 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-240 Year-2018 Thana- KATEYA District- Gopalganj ====================================================== Sushil Tiwari, aged about 32 years (Male), S/o Bedbeyash Tiari Resident of Village- Ter Khemraj, P.S.- Kateya, District- Gopalganj. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Harendra Prasad, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Jitendra Kumar Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL ORDER 18-08-2021 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State. Learned counsel for the petitioner hereby undertakes that all the defects pointed out by the stamp reporter shall be removed, and compliance with the conditions of the notices of this Court with regard to acceptance of e-filing shall be made, without delay immediately upon resumption of normal physical functioning of the Court, and in any event within one month thereof.

2. The present application has been filed for modification of the condition no. (iv) contained in Paragraph No. 4 of the order dated 15.02.2019 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 9051 of 2019.

3. It is submitted that the petitioner is working at

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7474 of 2021(2) dt.18-08-2021 2/2 Faridabad (Haryana) which is far away from Bihar. As such, it would entail considerable difficulty for the petitioner in complying with condition no. (iv) of Para-4 of the aforesaid order dated 15.02.2019 by physically presenting himself on each date before the Court below.

4. Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner, this Court is not inclined to accede to the prayer of the petitioner. Accordingly, the modification petition stands dismissed.

5. Office shall follow-up to ensure that all defects are removed and compliance with the notices of this Court are made by the petitioner within the stipulated time provided in para 1 hereinabove, failing which the matter shall be brought to the notice of this Court.

(Vikash Jain, J) rishi/- U T