The High Court disposed of an execution petition after the petitioner's counsel confirmed that the judgment in the underlying writ petition had been fully complied with. No fresh relief was granted.
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 Execution Petition No.279 of 2026 Decided on: 18.09.2026
____________________________________________________________ Roshan Lal
...Petitioner
Versus
The State of Himachal Pradesh and another
...Respondents
____________________________________________________________ Coram_ Hon'ble Mr. Justice Jiya Lal Bhardwaj, Judge Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioner: Mr. Ashok K. Tyagi, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General with Mr. Rupinder Singh Thakur, Additional Advocate General.
Jiya Lal Bhardwaj, Judge (Oral)
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the judgment dated 03.01.2025, passed in CWP No.4308 of 2024, titled, Roshan Lal vs. State of Himachal Pradesh
and others, has duly been complied with.
as having been fully satisfied. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, also stand disposed of.
18th September, 2026 ( Jiya Lal Bhardwaj ) (Anurag) Judge
1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Roshan Lal vs. State of Himachal PradeshReferred¶9
CWP No.4308 of 2024, titled, Roshan Lal vs. State of Himachal Pradesh and others
Roshan Lal
The State of Himachal Pradesh
and another
Jiya Lal Bhardwaj
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
