SUJIT MISHRA @ SUJIT KUMAR Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned counsel for the parties and this writ petition is being disposed of finally at this stage itself with agreement of the parties.

(2.) IT appears that the petitioner has been made an accused in connection with the G.R. Case No. 1166/2002 (T.R. No. 458/2008) in which cognizance for the offence under Section 16(A) of the Cable Television Networks (Regulation) Act, 1995 has been taken.

(3.) MR . M.M. Prasad, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner never evaded summon warrant issued rather he did not know at any time that any such summon or warrant has been issued against him. It is further submitted that since the offence alleged is bailable in nature therefore, there cannot be any occasion to evade the summon or the warrant.