Research › Search › Judgment

Madhya Pradesh High Court · body

2014 DIGILAW 1311 (MP)

Vidhyavati Pandey v. State of M. P.

2014-10-10

SUJOY PAUL

body2014
JUDGMENT : IA No. 5976/2013 for dismissal of the petition is taken up. 2. By filing this application, it is stated that the petitioner prayed for grant of benefit of FR 22(D) but by representation dated 16.06.2009 (Annexure R/2) stated that although she prayed for grant of benefit of FR 22(D), she is no more willing to to take the said benefit. It is specifically prayed by the petitioner that benefit of FR 22(D) by cancelled. On the strength of this, it is prayed that petition has rendered infructuous. 3. Shri Rana submits that he is not getting any instructions from the petitioner. Considering the aforesaid, since petitioner has waived her right to get benefit of FR 22 (D), no useful purpose would be served to keep this petition pending. Petitioner in no uncertain terms made it clear that she not claiming benefit of FR 22(D). The relief claimed by the petitioner is based on benefit of FR22(D). Hence, nothing remains to be done in this petition. IA is allowed. Petition is dismissed.