Seema Bawa v. State
Case brief
What is this about?
The High Court dismissed a petition as infructuous due to intervening developments without engaging in substantive adjudication or legal reasoning.
What did the court decide?
Petition dismissed as infructuous due to intervening developments.
What the court decided
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
COPC (T) No. 122 of 2008 Decided on: 08.11.2010
Ms. Seema Bawa
…Petitioner
Versus
Sudripto Roi and others.
…Respondents.
Coram:
The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Sharma, Judge.
Whether approved for reporting?1 .
For the petitioner : Mr. Banbhushan Singh, Advocate vice counsel. For the respondents : Mr. P.M. Negi, Deputy Advocate General with Mr.R.P. Singh, Assistant Advocate General.
Rajiv Sharma, Judge (Oral) :
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
Seema Bawa
- respondent
Sudripto Roi and others.
Coram
Rajiv Sharma
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- Himachal Pradesh HC
- Decided on
- · November
- Registered
- Case no.
- COPCT/122/2008
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court