The single-judge bench held that the admitted contempt petition had become infructuous since the underlying writ petition was disposed of by a previous order on the same date. Consequently, the court disposed of the present application summarily.
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.
HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
COCP No.2343 of 2010 (O&M) Date of Decision: 10.08.2011
SI Gurbinder Singh
VS.
AR Talwar, PS Govt. of Punjab & Ors.
. . . . Respondents
CORAM : HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT
1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
2. To be referred to the Reporters or not?
3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?
Present: Mr. APS Shergill, Advocate; for the petitioner(s)
SURYA KANT, J. (ORAL)
Since the CWP No.11993 of 2010 has been disposed of by
this Court vide an order of even date passed in CWP No.7075 of 2011
titled as Sub Inspector Sanjeev Kumar & Anr. v. State of Punjab
& Ors. , the present contempt petition has become infructuous and is disposed of accordingly.
Dasti .
10.08.2011 (S u r y a K a n t) vishal shonkar Judge
SI Gurbinder Singh
AR Talwar
Surya Kant
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
