C482/1617/2018
2023 Latest Caselaw 71 UK

C-482 No.1617 of 2018
Hon'ble Ravindra Maithani, J.

Mr. Sandeep Kothari and Mr. Alok Kumar, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. V.S. Rathore, A.G.A. for the State.

This matter was taken up on 07.03.2019 when this Court stayed the operation of the impugned order.

Now, Modification Application (IA) No.10971 of 2022 has been filed with the request that instead of stay the operation of the order, the proceedings of the court below may be stayed.

In fact, by the impugned order, an application filed under Section 311 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 by the petitioner has been rejected, so if the operation of the impugned order is stayed, does not make any effect. 07.03.2019 was fixed for judgment. On that date judgment was not pronounced because it was found that the respondent no.2 has not been issued notices although, in the same order, Mr. B.M. Pingal, Advocate has been shown as counsel appearing for the respondent no.2.

Today, Mr. B.M. Pingal, Advocate is before the Court. He would submit that, in fact, he was not representing the respondent no.2 on that date. It appears to be inadvertent mistake while noting his presence.

The statement of Mr. B.M. Pingal, Advocate is taken on record.

The respondent no.2 is personally served.

List this matter on 09.01.2023, just after fresh, for final hearing.

Till the next date of listing, the proceedings of the court below shall remain in abeyance.

(Ravindra Maithani, J.) 05.01.2023 Sanjay