The petitioner sought to withdraw the instant petition, intending to avail the appropriate remedy before the Court below. The respondent had no objection. Consequently, the petition was dismissed.
The petition is dismissed for having been withdrawn.
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 No.48881 of 2021
Date of Decision: 16th December, 2021.
Sahil, a minor through his mother Monika Rani
...Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab
...Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MEENAKSHI I. MEHTA
Present: Mr. Ajiteshwar Advocate, for the petitioner ( joined through virtual mode ).
MEENAKSHI I. MEHTA, J. (ORAL)
After arguing for a while, learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission to withdraw the instant petition while submitting that the petitioner would be availing the appropriate and efficacious remedy before the Court below.
Mr. Amitoj Singh Dhaliwal, learned Deputy Advocate General, Punjab, who has appeared in this case in pursuance of the copy of the present petition having been sent to the respondent-State in advance, has no objection for the same.
Resultantly, the petition in hand stands dismissed for having been withdrawn accordingly.
(MEENAKSHI I. MEHTA) JUDGE
16.12.2021.
seema
| Whether speaking/reasoned? | Yes |
|---|---|
| Whether Reportable? | No |
SEEMA SHARMA 2021.12.16 17:13 I attest to the accuracy of this order
Sahil, a minor through his mother Monika Rani
State of Punjab
Meenakshi I. Mehta
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
