Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Rajasthan · body

2025 DAILYLAW 43716 (RAJ)

SUNIL YADAV S/O SITARAM YADAV v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

CRLMP/6447/2021 · 2025-10-27

Anand Sharma

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

[2025:RJ-JP:43052] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 6447/2021 1. Sunil Yadav S/o Sitaram Yadav, Aged About 22 Years, R/o Pujari Ki Dhani, Tehsil Nawalgarh, Jhunjhunu, Rajasthan. 2. Vikas Dhayal S/o Radheyshyam, Aged About 26 Years, R/o Chara Ka Bas, Parsrampura, Tehsil- Nawalgarh, Jhunjhunu, Rajasthan. 3. Amit Khakhil S/ol Hetram, Aged About 22 Years, R/o Sakhaniyo Ki Dhani, Village Bhanpura C ----Petitioners Versus 1. The Superintendent of Police, Sikar, Rajasthan. 2. The SHO, Police Station- Balara, District Sikar, Rajasthan. 3. Satveer S/o Shrichand, Aged About 41 Years, R/o Pujari Ki Dhani, Tehsil Nawalgarh, Jhunjhunu, Rajasthan. ----Complainant/Respondents For Petitioner(s) : None present For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vivek Choudhary, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANAND SHARMA Order 27/10/2025 1. No one has put in appearance on behalf of the petitioner. 2. Lodging of FIR No.184/2021 registered at Police Station Balara, District Sikar for the offences under Section 143, 341, 323, 427, 382 & 506 of IPC has been questioned by the petitioner in the instant petition which was filed on 01.10.2021. 3. However, despite lapse of more than four years, no steps have been taken by the petitioner to cure the defect(s) pointed out by the Registry. [2025:RJ-JP:43052] (2 of 2) [CRLMP-6447/2021] 4. In view of above, when nobody is there to represent the petitioner, it appears that the petitioner has lost interest to pursue the instant criminal miscellaneous petition and the same is hereby dismissed for want of prosecution. (ANAND SHARMA),J DIVYA /79