The petition was closed and disposed of as not pressed by the petitioner without any substantive decision on the merits or legal principles.
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.
Date of decision: 09.12.2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.10235 of 2024.
| Sonu Chauhan | …Petitioner. Versus |
|---|---|
| State of H.P. and Others | . …Respondent. |
| Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Vive |
k Singh Thakur, Judge. |
| Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rak | esh Kainthla, Judge. |
| Whether approved for r | eporting? |
| For the Petitioner. | Mr. Ajay Advocate vice Mr. Pankaj Sawant, Advocate. |
| For the Respondents: | Mr. Pawan Kumar Nadda, Additional Advocate General for the respondent-State. |
Vivek Singh Thakur, Judge (Oral)
Mr. Ajay, Advocate, appearing under instructions of original counsel Mr. Pankaj Sawant, Advocate, submits that as per instructions imparted by the petitioner, grievance of petitioner is being redressed by the respondent and, therefore, at this stage, he does not press the present petition.
Considering the submission made by learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, the petition is closed and disposed of as not pressed along with pending miscellaneous application(s) if any.
(Vivek Singh Thakur), Judge.
(Rakesh Kainthla), Judge. 9th December, 2024. (munish)
Sonu Chauhan
State of H.P.
Vivek Singh Thakur
Rakesh Kainthla
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
