Petition seeking anticipatory bail rendered infructuous as petitioners stated threat perception no longer subsists. Petition dismissed without representation.
Petition dismissed as infructuous without prejudice to future jurisdiction invocation.
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.
���������������������������������������� ��������������
����������������������� Date of decision: 23rd July, 2015
Neeru Kaur and another
� Petitioners
Versus
State of Punjab and others
� Respondents
������������� ��������!����������������!�����
Mr. J.S. Brar, Asstt. Advocate General, Punjab for respondents No.1 to 3.
None for respondents No.4 to 6.
�����������!����"���#��� $
Learned State counsel on instructions from HC Jagtar Singh submits that the boy and girl, both petitioners, have made statements before the police that the threat perception to their life and liberty no more subsists, in view of which the present petition has been rendered infructuous.
Since there is no representation on behalf of the petitioners, the present petition stands dismissed having been rendered infructuous, however, the petitioners shall be at liberty to invoke the jurisdiction of this Court if the need so arises.
#�����������!����$� ������
�%&'��("������
RATTAN PAL SINGH 2015.07.27 17:27 ��� I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Punjab & Haryana High Court
Neeru Kaur and another
State of Punjab and others
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
