None of the petitioners appeared before the court for the second call. The court dismissed the criminal miscellaneous petition for want of prosecution.
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 Misc. No. M-10765 of 2012 (O&M) Date of Decision: 17.7.2013
Sahdev and others
......Petitioners
Versus
State of Haryana and another
.......Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA
Present: None for the petitioners.
Mr. Gaurav Dhir, DAG, Haryana.
Mr. R.K.Sharma, Advocate for respondent No. 2.
SABINA, J.
Even on the second call, none has appeared on behalf of
the petitioners.
Accordingly, this petition is dismissed for want of
prosecution.
(SABINA) JUDGE
July 17, 2013 Gurpreet
Singh Gurpreet 2013.07.19 16:42 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document chandigarh
Sahdev and others
State of Haryana
SABINA
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
