Disposed

Priyanka Thakur v. M.Sudha Devi and Others

Himachal Pradesh HC18 Sept 2026COPC/1242/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court closed and disposed of a contempt petition after learning that the judgment underlying the contempt allegation had been stayed by a Division Bench in two Letters Patent Appeals. The petitioner was granted liberty to revive the contempt petition when the occasion arises.

What did the court decide?

Contempt petition closed and disposed of; petitioner at liberty to revive the petition when the occasion arises.

Priyanka Thakur Vs M.Sudha Devi and Others — Contempt of Court | Himachal Pradesh HC (2026)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. ( 2026:HHC:39875

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA Contempt Petition No.1242 of 2026 Date of decision: 18.09.2026

¶3

Priyanka Thakur Versus	….Petitioner
Sudha Devi & Ors.	….Respondents

¶4

Coram:

¶5

The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sushil Kukreja, J.

¶6

Whether approved for reporting ?¹

¶7

For the Petitioner:	Ms. Mamta Garg, Advocate.
For the Respondents:	Mr. B.N. Sharma, Additional General.	Advocate

¶8

Sushil Kukreja, Judge(Oral):

¶9

Learned Additional Advocate General, has placed on record communication dated 17.09.2026, wherein, it has been stated that judgment dated 21.03.2024, passed in CWP No.2056 of 2023, titled as Ghanshyam Dass vs. State of H.P. & Ors., with a lead case titled as Yashwant Kumar vs. State of H.P. & Ors. bearing CWP No.8148 of 2022, has been stayed by the Hon’ble Division Bench vide LPA No.295 of 2026 and 316 of 2025, respectively. Accordingly, keeping in view the above factual position, the representation of the present petitioner has been kept pending by the respondent-department till the final outcome/decision in the aforesaid LPA.

¶10

Therefore, in view of the above, at this stage, no further order is required to be passed in the present contempt petition and accordingly,

¶11

¶12

Whether the reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgement ?

¶13

2 Neutral Citation No. ( 2026:HHC:39875

¶14

the same is closed and disposed of. However, the petitioner is at liberty to

¶15

revive the present contempt petition, as and when the occasion arises.

¶16

( Sushil Kukreja ) Judge

¶17

September 18, 2026 (reena)

Priyanka Thakur v. M.Sudha Devi and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Priyanka Thakur v. M.Sudha Devi and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases