A writ petition was heard via video conferencing where petitioners and counsel were absent. The Court held that the petitioners were not interested in further prosecution and dismissed the petition for non-prosecution.
Petition dismissed for non-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
CRWP No. 1119 of 2020 DATE OF DECISION :- July 02, 2021
Meena Dhir and another
...Petitioners
Versus
The State of Punjab and others
...Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.S. MADAAN
Present :- None for the petitioners.
Mr. J.S. Ghuman, DAG, Punjab.
The case has been taken up through Video Conferencing.
Neither the petitioners nor their counsel are present in the Court. It seems that the petitioners are not interested in further prosecution of the petition, therefore, the same stands dismissed for non-prosecution.
(H.S. MADAAN) JUDGE
July 02, 2021 p.singh Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No
PARVINDER SINGH 2021.07.02 15:54 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
Meena Dhir
The State of Punjab
H.S. MADAAN
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
