State appeal against the respondent. Both sides agreed the respondent had died, so the court disposed of the appeal as abated. No substantive issue was decided.
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.
2024:HHC:4619
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA.
Cr. A. No. 4126 of 2013
Date of decision: 05.07.2024
State of H.P. …Appellant Versus Poshan Mahanto …Respondent Co ram
The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Tarlok Singh Chauhan, Judge. The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sushil Kukreja, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? For the Appellant: Mr. Anup Rattan, A. G. with Ms. Sharmila Patial, Mr. Navlesh Verma, Addl. A.Gs. and Mr. J. S. Guleria, Dy. A.G.
For the Respondent: Nemo
Tarlok Singh Chauhan, Judge (Oral)
The parties are ad idem that the respondent is no longer in the land of living.
Consequently, the appeal is disposed of as abated.
(Tarlok Singh Chauhan)
Judge
(Sushil Kukreja) 5th July, 2024 Judge (sanjeev)
State of H.P.
Poshan Mahanto
Tarlok Singh Chauhan
Sushil Kukreja
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
