BAJRANGLAL RAMLAL SHARMAversusRAJKUMAR S SHARMA
- Disposal
- 43-DISMISSED FOR DEFAULT @ FH
- Bench
- SANJEEV THAKER
Holding
The appeal is dismissed for want of prosecution due to the appellant's failure to appear and lack of a valid vakalatnama.
Summary
In Criminal Appeal No. 390 of 2011 before the Gujarat High Court, the appellant, Bajranglal Ramlal Sharma, was represented initially by Advocate Sanjay R. Gupta who consented to withdraw his appearance. The court recorded this withdrawal and directed that Advocate Jitendra K. Jain be allowed to appear for the appellant. However, the court found that no vakalatnama authorizing Advocate Jain's appearance was on record. On the scheduled hearing date, neither the appellant nor any counsel appeared, and no request for adjournment was made. Consequently, the bench dismissed the appeal for want of prosecution.
Issues considered
- What is the effect of the appellant's failure to produce a valid vakalatnama for the newly appointed counsel?
- Can the appeal proceed in the absence of any appearance or request for adjournment by the appellant?
Subjects
Judgment
R/CR.A/390/2011 ORDER DATED: 06/02/2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 390 of 2011
==========================================================
BAJRANGLAL RAMLAL SHARMA
Versus
RAJKUMAR S SHARMA & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR SANJAY R GUPTA(341) for the Appellant(s) No. 1
MR R.K.MANSURI(3205) for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 1
MS SHRUTI PATHAK, APP for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 2
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE SANJEEV J.THAKER
Date : 06/02/2026
ORAL ORDER
The coordinate Bench has passed the following
order on 13.7.2022:
“1. Vide communication dated 27.06.2022, learned advocate
Mr.Sanjay Gupta has given consent for withdrawal of his
appearance, the same is taken on record.
2. Learned advocate Mr.Jitendra K Jain states that he has
instructions to appear on behalf of the appellant. Registry to
accept the appearance of learned advocate Mr.Jitendra K
Jain as an advocate for the appellant.
3. Registry to do the needful. Stand over to 18.08.2022.”
However, on verification of the record, no such
Page 1 of 2
R/CR.A/390/2011 ORDER DATED: 06/02/2026
vakalatnama is found on the record.
Today also, none present even in the second call
nor any request for adjournment is made.
In view of the same, this matter is dismissed for
want of prosecution.
(SANJEEV J.THAKER,J)
SRILATHA
Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge.
Digitally signed by: SRILATHA VENKATARAO UPADHYAYULA(HC00185), PRINCIPAL PRIVATE SECRETARY, at High Court of Gujarat on 06/02/2026 16:30:50
Page 2 of 2
Search Indian case law
Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.