The court dismissed the writ petition as not pressed by the petitioner's counsel because the State counsel stated the case was fixed for defence evidence before the trial court.
Petition dismissed as not pressed.
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
CRM NO. M-16377 OF 2012 (O&M) DECIDED ON : 11.09.2012
Raju Kumar Shah
...Petitioner
versus
State of Haryana
...Respondent
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. C. PURI
Present : Mr. Deepak Aggarwal, Advocate, for the petitioner.
Mr. P. M. Anand, Additional AG, Haryana.
Mr. Adish Gupta, Advocate, for the complainant.
K. C. PURI, J. (ORAL)
Learned State counsel, on instructions from ASI Des Raj, has stated at the bar that the case is fixed for 18.09.2012 for defence evidence before the trial Court.
In view of statement made by learned State counsel, learned counsel for the petitioner do not press the present petition.
Dismissed as not pressed.
SEPTEMBER 11, 2012 (K. C. PURI) shalini JUDGE
Raju Kumar Shah
State of Haryana
K. C. PURI
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
