Petition dismissed as infructuous due to absence of petitioner and apparent fulfillment of petition purpose. No substantive issue on habeas corpus adjudicated by the court.
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 PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Criminal Writ Petition No.467 of 2010 Date of Decision 19.03.2010
Arvind Kumar
...... Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
State of Haryana and others
...... Respondent(s)
CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.N.JINDAL
Present: None for the petitioner. Mr.Rajiv Malhotra, Addl. Advocate General, Haryana.
A.N.JINDAL, J(ORAL):
The petitioner has preferred this petition for issuance of a writ in the nature of Habeas Corpus, for appointment of Warrant Officer, for getting released the alleged detenues, as mentioned in para No.4, of the petition, from the illegal detention of respondents No.4 and 5.
None has put in appearance on behalf of the petitioner. It appears that the purpose, for which the present petition has been filed, stands served.
In view of aforesaid, this petition, having become infructuous,
is dismissed.
19.03.2010 mamta-II
Arvind Kumar
State of Haryana
A.N. Jindal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
