Petitioners were absent without cause. Court dismissed the petition for want of prosecution.
Dismissed 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
CRM-M-40673 of 2018 Date of Decision: 25.02.2019
Gurjinder Kaur and another
...Petitioners
Versus
The State of Punjab
....Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAMENDRA JAIN
Present:None for the petitioners. Mr. Harpreet Multani, AAG, Punjab. H.S. Brar, Advocate, for the complainant.
RAMENDRA JAIN, J. (ORAL)
Learned counsel has filed vakalatnama on behalf of the complainant on his own, though he has not been impleaded as party. The same is taken on record.
On previous date also the petitioners had gone unrepresented. Even today, none is present on their behalf. Therefore, it can safely be inferred that petitioners or their counsel are no more interested in pursuing this petition.
Dismissed for want of prosecution.
(RAMENDRA JAIN)
February 25, 2019 R.S.
JUDGE
Whether speaking/reasoned
Yes/No
Whether Reportable Yes/No
RAVINDER SINGH 2019.02.26 09:03 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document
Gurjinder Kaur and another
The State of Punjab
RAMENDRA JAIN
HARPREET MULTANI
H S BRAR
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
