Petitioner in a criminal contempt petition was absent. Counsel for respondents submitted that the petitioner has died. The High Court dismissed the petition as infructuous.
Contempt petition dismissed as infructuous.
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.
CROCP No. 13 of 1999
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
CROCP No. 13 of 1999 DATE OF DECISION :- August 02, 2016
Daljit Singh Rajput ...Petitioner
Versus
Dilsher Singh and others
...Respondents
CORAM: HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE M.JEYAPAUL
HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SNEH PRASHAR
Present :- None for the petitioner.
Mr. Sandeep Kumar, Advocate for respondent no.1. Mr. R.S. Randhawa, Addl. Advocate General, Punjab.
Mr. Rajeev Sharma, Advocate for U.T. Chandigarh. ***
M.JEYAPAUL, J.
This is a criminal contempt petition filed by Sh. Daljit Singh Rajput, Advocate practicing in this High Court. The petitioner party in person had been absent consistently for many hearings. We issued notice during last hearing but the summons could not be served as it was disclosed that he was afflicted with cancer. Now the learned Amicus Curiae Mr. Vivek Singla and the counsel appearing for U.T., Chandigarh and also for
Parvinder Singh 2016.08.05 15:55 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh
CROCP No. 13 of 1999 2
the private respondents unanimously submit that the petitioner has died.
In view of the above development, the contempt petition stands
dismissed as infructuous.
(M. JEYAPAUL) JUDGE
(SNEH PRASHAR) JUDGE August 02 , 2016 p.singh Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No
Parvinder Singh 2016.08.05 15:55 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh
Daljit Singh Rajput
Dilsher Singh
M.JEYAPAUL
SNEH PRASHAR
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
