Gauhati High Court
WP(C)/274/2026 of SRI JITEN MALAKAR Vs THE STATE BANK OF INDIA AND 3 ORS on 14 May 2026
GAHC010290042025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/274/2026 SRI JITEN MALAKAR S/O- LATE TARANI MALAKAR. R/O- HOUSE NO.51. BAMUNIMAIDAM KUSHAL NAGAR, P.O- BAMINUMAIDAM. DISTRICT- KAMRUP (M), (ASSAM). GUWAHATI- 781021
Page No.# 1/2
GAHC010290042025
undefined
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : WP(C)/274/2026
SRI JITEN MALAKAR
S/O- LATE TARANI MALAKAR. R/O- HOUSE NO.51. BAMUNIMAIDAM
KUSHAL NAGAR, P.O- BAMINUMAIDAM. DISTRICT- KAMRUP (M), (ASSAM). GUWAHATI- 781021
VERSUS
THE STATE BANK OF INDIA AND 3 ORS
REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN, STATE BANK OF INDIA, CORPORATE
CENTRE, MADAM CAMA MARG, MUMBAI, MAHARASTRA-700041
2:THE BRANCH MANAGER
STATE BANK OF INDIA
NEW GUWAHATI BRANCH
BAMUNIMAIDAM
GUWAHATI-781021.
3:THE OFFICER IN CHARGE
CHANDMARI POLICE STATION
CHANDMARI
GUWAHATI-781003
4:THE OFFICER IN CHARGE
CYBER-CRIME BRANCH PANBAZAR
GUWAHATI-78100
Advocate for the Petitioner : MD S HOQUE, MR. M DEKA
Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM, N HASAN(R2),F. SHAHIN(R2),MR A
HUSSAIN(R2),P SINGH(R2),MR. B K SEN(R2)
Page No.# 2/2
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KAUSHIK GOSWAMI
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER
Date : 15.05.2026 Md. S. Hoque, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that during the pendency of the writ petition, the matter has become infructuous and accordingly, makes an endorsement to the said effect. Ms. M. Barman, learned Government Advocate for the State respondent and Mr. B. K. Sen, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No. 2 are present. In view of the aforesaid endorsement, the writ petition stands dismissed on being infructuous. JUDGE Comparing Assistant