PRATIBHA RANI
Ravinder P. Kumar – Appellant
Versus
State – Respondent
Pratibha Rani, J.
Crl.M.A.No.10612/2013
1. Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
2. Application stands disposed of.
Crl.M.A. Nos.10609/2013 & 9287/2014 (preponement of hearing)
1. Appellant states that as the matter had been heard he does not press these two applications.
2. Both the applications are dismissed for having become infructuous and as not pressed.
Crl.M.A. No.10610/2013
1. The above captioned application has been filed by the appellant with the following prayer:
“to pass an appropriate order to the concerned police authority to take respondent No.2, 3 and 4 into custody by arresting them to uphold majesty of law, in the interest of justice.”
2. In the instant application, the petitioner after giving the facts of the two criminal cases, has also made reference to the civil suit wherein a decree has been passed in his favour but not executed.
3. The ground on which direction to take respondents No.2 to 4 in custody has been sought is on their alleged wilful disobedience to furnish the bail bond as directed by this Court on 18.02.2013 while granting leave
Madan Mohan Singh v. State of U.P.
Aher Raja Khima v. State of Saurashtra
Balbir Singh v. State of Punjab
M.G. Agarwal v. State of Maharashtra
Noor Khan v. State of Rajasthan
Khedu Mohton v. State of Bihar
Shivaji Sahabrao Bobade v. State of Maharashtra
Bishan Singh v. State of Punjab
Umedbhai Jadavbhai v. State of Gujarat
K. Gopal Reddy v. State of A.P.
Bhagwan Singh v. State of M.P.
Harijana Thirupala v. Public Prosecutor, High Court of A.P.
C. Antony v. K.G. Raghavan Nair
State of Karnataka v. K. Gopalakrishna
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.