In a miscellaneous civil petition, the petitioners withdrew their complaint within the hearing. The court disposed of the petition and any pending applications without further orders.
Petition disposed of; pending applications disposed of.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No. 1670 of 2017
Date of decision: 21st August, 2017
Dinesh Kumar and another Petitioners Versus State of H.P. and others Respondents ______________________________________________________ Coram:
The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Karol, Acting Chief Justice
The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge
Whether approved for reporting1 :
For the Petitioners : Mr. V.B. Verma, Advocate
For the Respondents: Mr. Shrawan Dogra, Advocate General, with Mr. Romesh Verma, Deputy Advocate General.
______________________________________________________ Per Sanjay Karol, A.C.J. (Oral)
Learned counsel for the petitioner has placed on record statement of complainant Neha Kahil (petitioner No.2). In view of intervening developments, learned counsel for the petitioner does not press the present petition, with liberty reserved to approach the Court, if need so arises subsequently.
( Sanjay Karol ), Acting Chief Justice
1 Whether Reporters of local newspaper are permitted to see the judgment ?
Dinesh Kumar
One other
State of H.P.
Sanjay Karol
Sandeep Sharma
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
