Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Gujarat High Court

Jagdish Prataprai Sukhia vs State Of Gujarat on 30 November, 2018

Author: Bela M. Trivedi

Bench: Bela M. Trivedi

       R/SCR.A/2939/2013                                              ORDER




           IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

        R/SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 2939 of 2013
==========================================================
                           JAGDISH PRATAPRAI SUKHIA
                                    Versus
                              STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR VIMAL A PUROHIT(5049) for the PETITIONER(s) No. 1
MR NAMRATA R. MULCHANDANI for MR MANISH J PATEL(2131) for the
RESPONDENT(s) No. 2
MS KRINA P. CALLA, APP for the RESPONDENT(s) No. 1
==========================================================

 CORAM: HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE BELA M. TRIVEDI

                                  Date : 30/11/2018
ORAL ORDER

It is stated by learned Advocate Ms.Namrata R. Mulchandani for learned Advocate Mr.Manish Patel for the respondent no.2 that Investigating Officer has already filed B­summary report before the concerned Magistrate against which the respondent no.2­complaint has filed protest application.

In view of the above, learned Advocate Mr.Vimal Purohit for the applicant seeks permission to withdraw the present application at this juncture. However, he requests to direct the concerned Magistrate to expedite the hearing of the protest application filed by the respondent.

The permission, as sought for, is granted. Present application is dismissed as withdrawn. The concerned Magistrate Court shall decide the Page 1 of 2 R/SCR.A/2939/2013 ORDER B­summary report as well as protest application filed in the criminal case as expeditiously as possible in accordance with law. It is clarified that this Court has not gone into the merits of the case. Direct service is permitted.

(BELA M. TRIVEDI, J) TUVAR Page 2 of 2