Gujarat High Court High Court

Rustambhai vs Dipchand on 13 July, 2010

Gujarat High Court
Rustambhai vs Dipchand on 13 July, 2010
Author: Ravi R.Tripathi,&Nbsp;
   Gujarat High Court Case Information System 

  
  
    

 
 
    	      
         
	    
		   Print
				          

  


	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	


 


	 

CR.MA/785/2010	 1/ 3	ORDER 
 
 

	

 

IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
 

 


 

CRIMINAL
MISC.APPLICATION No. 785 of 2010
 

In


 

CRIMINAL
MISC.APPLICATION No. 9147 of 2009
 

 
 
=====================================
 

RUSTAMBHAI
SHAKURBHAI PATHAN - Applicant(s)
 

Versus
 

DIPCHAND
CHAMPAKLAL KUMAWAT & 1 - Respondent(s)
 

===================================== 
Appearance
: 
MR PN BAVISHI for Applicant(s)
: 1, 
None for Respondent(s) : 1, 
MR DG VYAS, APP for
Respondent(s) : 2, 
=====================================
 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

CORAM
			: 
			
		
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE RAVI R.TRIPATHI
		
	

 

Date
: 13/07/2010 

 

 
ORAL
ORDER

1.0 The
present application is filed praying;

6(b). Alternatively,
be pleased to restore Criminal Misc. Application No.
9147 of 2009, the order dated 18-4-2009 by the Hon’ble Court and in
the interest of justice, the Hon’ble Court may be pleased to restore
the Criminal Misc. Application No. 9147/2009 before the Hon’ble
Court. If the review is not tenable then this application may
be treated alternative under the heading of restoration of the
application.

2.0 This
application is affirmed on 29th December 2009 and is filed
on 12th January 2010 with an urgent note requesting the
Registry to place the matter for admission on 25th January
2010 so as to enable the learned advocate to obtain review order.

2.1 The
matter is listed on a separate board at Sr. No. 1. The matter was
called out in the morning, but the learned advocate Mr. PN Bavishi
for the applicant was not present. Instead of dismissing the matter,
the same was kept back so as to enable the learned advocate to attend
the matter in the second half.

2.2 Even
in the second half, on second call, the learned advocate for the
applicant is not present. The matter is taken up for consideration.

3.0 The
prayer made in the application is for review of the order dated 18th
April 2009 passed in Criminal Misc. Application No. 9147 of 2009,
later on, that prayer is scored off and it is alternatively prayed
for restoration as quoted herein above.

4.0 The
fact that order dated 2nd November 2009 is passed on
merits, there is no question of restoration of the matter.
Similarly, there is no scope for review in a criminal matter. Hence,
this application fails and the same is dismissed.

[
Ravi R. Tripathi, J. ]

hiren

   

Top