AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
6 paragraphs · 177 wordsBipin Chander Negi, J
The present petition has been filed challenging the impugned order dated 28.08.2023, passed by learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Rampur Bushahr, District Shimla, in Complaint No.263 of 2016, whereby the defence evidence of the petitioner has been closed.
Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the pleadings.
From the perusal of the impugned order it is evident the case at hand pertains to the year 2016. Besides the aforesaid, post resumption of normal work after Covid, no steps had been taken by the petitioner for bringing his defence evidence. In fact the petitioner did not take steps for bringing his defence evidence for seven long months after resumption of work post Covid. Even on 28.08.2023, despite the same being last opportunity, no defence evidence on behalf of the petitioner was produced.
In view of the aforesaid, no illegality and infirmity has been pointed out in the impugned order dated 28. 08.2023. Therefore, the petition being devoid of any merit is dismissed.
Pending miscellaneous application(s), also stands disposed of.