Appellant sought to withdraw a contempt petition. The single Judge permitted the withdrawal and dismissed the petition accordingly.
Contempt petition dismissed as withdrawn.
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.
Sr. No. 97
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT JAMMU
CCP(S) No. 35/2021
M/S Maa Vaishno Stone Crusher Th. Vinod Bharti and Anr.
…..Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s)
Through: Mr. Vidyansh Gupta, Advocate vice Mr. Y.E. Tak, Advocate.
Vs
State of J&K and others
.…. Respondent(s)
Through: None.
Coram: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DHIRAJ SINGH THAKUR, JUDGE
ORDER
10.09.2021
Mr. Vidyansh Gupta, Advocate appearing vice Mr. Y.E. Tak,
Advocate submits that he be permitted to withdraw the instant contempt petition.
His submission is taken on record.
Contempt petition is, accordingly, dismissed as withdrawn.
(Dhiraj Singh Thakur)
Judge
Jammu
10.09.2021 Ram Krishan
M/s Maa Vaishno Stone Crusher Th. Vinod Bharti and Anr.
State of J&K
Dhiraj Singh Thakur
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
