Allahabad High Court
DHEERAJ KUMAR SONKARversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS
- Decided
Holding
The writ petition is dismissed for want of prosecution and the interim order is vacated.
Summary
Dheeraj Kumar Sonkar filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition challenging actions of the State of Uttar Pradesh and two other respondents. No counsel appeared on behalf of the petitioner to address the court. The learned Additional Government Advocate for the State was the only party present. The court held that, in the absence of any prosecution, the petition could not be entertained and dismissed it for want of prosecution. Consequently, any interim order that had been granted earlier was vacated.
Issues considered
- Whether the writ petition can proceed in the absence of the petitioner’s representation?
- Whether the interim order, if any, should remain in force pending disposal of the petition?
Subjects
- writ petition
- criminal miscellaneous
- want of prosecution
- interim order vacated
- dismissal
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 16712 of 2025
Dheeraj Kumar Sonkar
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 2 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Vipin Kumar Singh
Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 48
HON'BLE CHANDRA DHARI SINGH, J.
HON'BLE TARUN SAXENA, J.
1. Case called out in the revised list. None appeared on behalf of the
petitioner to address the Court, however, learned A.G.A. for the State
is present.
2. In view of the above, the instant writ petition is dismissed for want
of prosecution.
3. Interim order, if any, stands vacated.
(Tarun Saxena,J.) (Chandra Dhari Singh,J.)
September 29, 2026
Saurabh
Digitally signed by :-
SAURABH KUMAR
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…