Patna High Court
Mr. Jitesh Kumar SachdevaversusState Of Bihar and Anr
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISS FOR NON-PROSECUTION
- Bench
- SUNIL DUTTA MISHRA
Holding
The petition was dismissed for non‑prosecution.
Summary
The petitioner, Jitesh Kumar Sachdeva, filed a petition seeking to quash an order dated 19 April 2017 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate in Complaint Case No. 449 of 2017. No counsel appeared on behalf of the petitioner, while the State was represented by an Additional Public Prosecutor. The High Court observed that the petitioner failed to prosecute the petition. Consequently, the petition was dismissed for non‑prosecution and the interim order dated 25 August 2018 was vacated.
Issues considered
- Whether a petition for quashing an order can be entertained when the petitioner fails to appear before the Court.
Subjects
- Criminal Procedure Code
- petition for quash
- non‑prosecution
- interim order vacated
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.17761 of 2018
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-449 Year-2017 Thana- GOPALGANJ COMPLAINT CASE
District- Gopalganj
======================================================
Mr. Jitesh Kumar Sachdeva S/o Sh. Mahesh Sachdeva, R/o 555/Ga /180,
Kanhiya Kunj Vihar, Gopal Nagar Road, Krishna Nagar, Lucknow-226023.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. State Of Bihar
2. Akhileshwar Shahi S/o Late Kashinath Shahi, R/o N.H. 28, Sareya Ward No.
4, Police Station and District-Gopalganj.
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : None
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri Ram Sevak Choudhary, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL DUTTA MISHRA
ORAL ORDER
5 19-02-2026 The present petition has been filed for quashing the
order dated 19.04.2017 passed by the learned Chief Judicial
Magistrate, Gopalganj in Complaint Case No. 449 of 2017.
2. No one is present on behalf of the petitioner,
however, learned A.P.P. for the State is present. On the previous
date (i.e. 02.02.2026) also no one was present on behalf of the
petitioner.
3. Consequently, the present petition stands dismissed
for non-prosecution.
4. Interim order dated 25.08.2018 is vacated.
(Sunil Dutta Mishra, J)
rakhi/-
U T
Checking your session…