ANIL CHANDRA, Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. Deepak Kumar, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner.

(2.) Heard Mr. P.K. Appu, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State.

(3.) From perusal of the order sheet of this case this court finds that on 22.06.2020, learned counsel namely Shailendra Kumar Singh had informed the office of this court through his mobile phone that since he was travelling he was not able to assist this court on that date, but he assured that he shall join the case through video conferencing if the case is adjourned and listed on another date. Consequently, the matter was adjourned and was directed to be posted on 29.06.2020. Yesterday, it was reported by the office that in spite of link sent to Mr. Shailendra Kumar Singh for connecting himself through video conferencing, he did not join. It was also reported that in spite of repeated calls made to him, he did not respond to any of the calls. It was further reported that there was no communication from Mr. Shailendra Kumar Singh seeking any adjournment in the present case. Accordingly, this court heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State for the purposes of disposal of the present case. Thus, nobody appeared on behalf of opposite party No. 2 to assist this court.