In CWP No. 5025 of 2022, the High Court dismissed a petition when the petitioner failed to appear despite repeated calls for the hearing.
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.
Sunil Kumar vs. State of H.P. & others.
CWP No.5025 of 2022.
21.10.2022. Present: None for the petitioner.
Mr.Ashok Sharma, Advocate General with Mr. Rajinder Dogra, Senior Additional Advocate General, Mr. Vinod Thakur, Mr. Shiv Pal Manhans, Additional Advocate Generals, Mr. Bhupinder Thakur, Deputy Advocate General and Mr. Rajat Chauhan, Law Officer, for the respondents-State.
Mr. Mukul Sood, Advocate, for respondent No.3.
Mr. Arvind Sharma, Advocate, for respondent Nos. 4 and 5.
Despite case being called repeatedly, none has put in appearance on behalf of the petitioner. Therefore, this Court is left with no other option, but to dismiss the petition in default and for want of prosecution. Ordered accordingly.
(Tarlok Singh Chauhan) Judge
(Virender Singh) Judge 21st October, 2022. (krt)
Sunil Kumar
State of H.P.
Respondent No.3
Respondent Nos. 4 and 5
Tarlok Singh Chauhan
Virender Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
