Petitioners withdrew their criminal miscellaneous petition. The court allowed withdrawal, dismissed the petition, and directed expedited trial due to the FIR dating back to 2005.
Withdrawal of the present petition allowed; dismissed as withdrawn; trial directed to be expedited.
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.
Crl.Misc.No. M-22077 of 2012 Date of Decision:- 18.12.2012.
Bhupinder Singh and another
Petitioner.
Versus
State of Haryana
Respondent.
CORAM : HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE NARESH KUMAR SANGHI.
Present: - Mr.HPS Bhinder, Advocate, for Mr. Arvinder Arora, Advocate,
for the petitioners.
NARESH KUMAR SANGHI,J.
After arguing the case for some time, learned counsel prays for withdrawal of the present petition.
Allowed as prayed for.
Dismissed as withdrawn.
Since the FIR relates to the year 2005, therefore,
learned trial court is directed to expedite the trial.
(NARESH KUMAR SANGHI) JUDGE
18.12.2012.
Anoop
Bhupinder Singh
another
State of Haryana
NARESH KUMAR SANGHI
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
