In a criminal revision petition, the High Court dismissed the matter as infructuous because the State counsel submitted that the petitioner had expired. No further reasoning was provided.
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 & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
GAURAV ARORA 2016.12.15 10:36 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh
Crl. Revn. No. 1590 of 2003 Date of decision : 12.12.2016
Mukhtiar Singh
....Petitioner
versus
State of Haryna
..Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RITU BAHRI
Present : None for the petitioner
Ms. Mahima Yashpal, A.A.G, Haryana
RITU BAHRI , J. (Oral)
Learned State counsel at the very outset submits that the present
petition has become infructuous, as the petitioner had expired.
Accordingly, the present petition is dismissed as having become
rendered infructuous.
| 12.12.20 | 16 | (RITU BAHRI) |
|---|---|---|
| G Arora | JUDGE | |
| Whether speaking/reasoned | Yes | |
| Whether reportable | No |
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the present petition has become infructuous due to the death of the petitioner.
Mukhtiar Singh
State of Haryna
Ritu Bahri
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
