Petitioner sought permission to withdraw the present Cr.MP(M) petition during argument. Permission was granted and the petition dismissed as withdrawn. Pending applications were also dismissed.
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Cr.MP(M) No. 1750 of 2024 Date of Decision: 06.12.2024
Mohammad Bilal ... petitioner Versus State of H.P ....Respondent Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rakesh Kainthla , Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 : For the petitioners Mr. K.S. Gill and Mr. Pankaj Mehta, Advocates. For the respondent : Mr. Lokender Kutlehria, Additional Advocate General.
Rakesh Kainthla, Judge (oral)
After arguing the matter for some time, learned counsel of the petitioner seeks permission to withdraw the present petition. Permission granted.
( Rakesh Kainthla) Judge
6th December, 2024 (saurav pathania)
1
Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes.
Mohammad Bilal
State of H.P
Rakesh Kainthla
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
