Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.
Dharmanand Mishra- Petitioner
Versus
State of Jharkhand & Anr. - Opposite Parties
Cr.M.P. No. 802, 861 of 2015, 613 of 2014
Decided On : 06-04-2022
Video Conferencing - COVID-19 Pandemic - Dismissal of Petitions
Fact of the Case:
The petitions were taken through Video Conferencing due to the COVID-19 pandemic. The petitioners sought permission to take all the grounds at an appropriate stage, and the State had no objection. One petition was dismissed as withdrawn with liberty, and two other petitions were dismissed for default as nobody responded on behalf of the petitioners.
Finding of the Court:
The court dismissed one petition as withdrawn with liberty and dismissed two other petitions for default due to lack of response from the petitioners.
Issues: Dismissal of petitions, permission to take all grounds at an appropriate stage, lack of response from petitioners
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was influenced by the lack of response from the petitioners and the guidelines for conducting proceedings through video conferencing due to the COVID-19 pandemic.
Final Decision: One petition was dismissed as withdrawn with liberty, and two other petitions were dismissed for default.
JUDGMENT :
1. These petitions have been taken through Video Conferencing in view of the guidelines of the High Court taking into account the situation arising due to COVID-19 pandemic.
Cr.M.P. No. 613/2014
2. Mr. Nilesh Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioners seeks permission to take all the grounds at appropriate stage.
3. Learned counsel for the State has got no objection.
4. Accordingly, Cr.M.P. No. 613/2014 is dismissed as withdrawn with the aforesaid liberty.
5. Cr.M.P. No.802/2015 & Cr.M.P. No.861/2015
6. On repeated calls nobody responded on behalf of petitioners.
7. Accordingly, Cr.M.P. No.802/2015 & Cr.M.P. No.861/2015 are dismissed for default.
Dismissal of petitions due to lack of response and adherence to guidelines for conducting proceedings through video conferencing during the COVID-19 pandemic
The availability of an efficacious alternate remedy may preclude the invocation of the writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the court's authority to direct a public official to take action on a representation within a specified timeframe.
The court's power under Section 482 Cr.P.C to issue directions for timely redressal of claims.
The court emphasized the importance of considering the complexity of issues involved in a suit before allowing a party to lead evidence through video conferencing and highlighted the requirement of c....
The court may extend the time for compliance with a court order if genuine reasons for non-compliance are presented.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
