Bombay High CourtAPL/94/2017dismissed

Sau. Shikha W/O. Amol Meshram v. State Of Maharashtra Thr. Police Station Officer Nagpur And Others

2021-01-19Hon'Ble Shri Justice Z.A. Haq,Hon'Ble Shri Justice Amit B. Borkar2 pages

1 apl94.17

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR CRI. APPLICATION (APL) NO. 94 OF 2017 (SAU.SHIKHA AMOL MESHARAM...VS.. STATE OF MAH. THR. PSO PS AJNI, NAGPUR & OTH.) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court'

s or Judge'

s orders appearances, Court'

s orders of directions and Registrar'

s orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - None for Applicant.

Shri S.D.Sirpurkar, A.P.P.for Non-applicant No.1. CORAM : Z.A.HAQ AND AMIT B.BORKAR, JJ.

DATED : JANUARY 19, 2021.

None present for the applicant. Learned A.P.P. for the Non-applicant No.1/State.

This Court, on 13th February 2017 issued notices to the non-applicants. On 5th June 2017 the learned Advocate appearing for the applicant filed pursis stating that he had no instructions from the applicant to continue for and on behalf of the applicant. In view of the said pursis, this Court discharged the Advocate appearing for the applicant. On 4th January 2018 none appeared for the applicant and it was noted that even on earlier occasion no-one had appeared for the applicant.

On 4th January 2018 this Court directed the trial Court to expeditiously conduct the trial for the offence punishable under Section 498-A read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

Today, when the matter was called out, again noone appeared for the applicant.

2 apl94.17 In our view, the directions issued on 4th January 2018 would meet the ends of justice. Since, it appears that the applicant is not interested in prosecuting the present application, the application needs to be dismissed in default. Hence, the application is dismissed for want of prosecution.

(AMIT B.BORKAR, J) (Z.A.HAQ, J) RRaut..