Leila @ Fajitun v. State of Manipur and Anr
Court: High Court of Manipur
Bench: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE AHANTHEM BIMOL SINGH
Judgment date:
Case summary
High Court of Manipur judgment dated 2026-04-14. Leila @ Fajitun v. State of Manipur and Anr. Read the judgment and case details on LawSphereX.
Judgment text
Item Nos. 132 IN THE HIGH COURT OF MANIPUR AT IMPHAL MC(Crl. Rev. P. ) No. 8 of 2026 Leila @ Fajitun …Applicant/s Vrs. State of Manipur & Anr …Respondent/s -B E F O R E- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AHANTHEM BIMOL SINGH 15. 04. 2026 [1] Mrs. G. Puspha, learned counsel appeared on behalf of the applicant and Mr. H. Samarjit, learned Sr. counsel and GA appeared on behalf of the respondents through VC platform. [2] It has been submitted by Mrs. G. Puspha that a Criminal Revision Petition has been preferred by the present applicant against the order dated 11. 03. 2026 passed by the learned Special Court of ND&PS (Manipur-1) in Special Trial Case No. 16 of 2025, however, the said Criminal Revision Petition was not accepted by the Registry of this Court on the ground that the required certified copy of the impugned order is not enclosed in the said revision petition.
[3] The learned counsel further submitted that due to certain inconvenience, the applicant cannot obtained the certified copy of the said impugned order, however, a true copy of the said impugned order has been enclosed by the applicant in the said connected revision petition. Page 1 [4] It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that the present application has been filed with a prayer for allowing the applicant to file certified copy of the said impugned order as and when the certified copy of the same is issued. The learned counsel further submitted that pending filing of the certified copy, the connected Criminal Revision Petition be heard as some urgency is involved. [5] Mr. H. Samarjit, learned Sr. counsel and GA appearing for the respondents submitted that he has no objection to the prayer made on behalf of the applicant in the present application and that the application can be allowed.
[6] In view of the submission made by the learned counsel appearing for the parties, this Court is of the considered view that it will be in the interest of justice to hear the said revision petition on merit on the basis of the true copy of the impugned order filed by the present applicant. [7] Accordingly, Registry is directed to registered the said connected Revision Petition and list it for motion hearing if the same is found in order. [8] With the aforesaid direction, the present application is disposed of. JUDGE Lucy Page 2
Source: Supreme Court eSCR. Dataset: Dattam Labs, CC BY 4.0. Text extracted automatically; compare with the source PDF for layout and accuracy.