Patna High Court
Mithlesh Ray @ Mithlesh KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- PRAVEEN KUMAR
Holding
The court allowed the withdrawal of the application and disposed of it as withdrawn without addressing the merits.
Summary
The petitioner, Mithlesh Ray, filed an application seeking to challenge an order taking cognizance in a criminal miscellaneous case. Later, the petitioner moved the court to withdraw this application, stating the intention to challenge the order in the future if needed. The Hon'ble Justice Praveen Kumar allowed the withdrawal. The application was disposed of as withdrawn, and the court expressly clarified that it did not express any opinion on the merits of the underlying case.
Issues considered
- What is the appropriate procedure for withdrawing an application seeking to challenge an order taking cognizance?
Subjects
- withdrawal of application
- criminal procedure
- order taking cognizance
- procedural order
- high court
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.8714 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-307 Year-2023 Thana- BEUR District- Patna
======================================================
Mithlesh Ray @ Mithlesh Kumar Son of Suresh Ray Resident of village-
Near Beur Jail, Bitaura (Betaura), P.S.- Beur, District- Patna
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Kamlesh Kumar Kamal Son of Kameshwar Prasad Resident of village-
Bitaura P.S.- Beur, District- Patna At P/A- shivpuri Udan tola (Uran Tola),
Ps- Gardanibagh, Dist- Patna
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Diwakar, Advocate
Mr. Deepak Kr., Advocate
Ms. Priya Kumari, Advocate
Ms. Saheeba Naz, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Ashok Kumar Singh, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEEN KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
2 26-03-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner prays that he
would be withdrawing this application so as to challenge the
order taking cognizance if taken in future.
3. Prayer is allowed.
4. This application is disposed of as withdrawn with
the liberty aforesaid.
5. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed
any opinion on the merits of this case.
(Praveen Kumar, J)
shivam/-
U T
Checking your session…