Petitioner's counsel noted a cancellation report filed but contested by the Excise Department. The Court held any grievance should be addressed before the Courts below and dismissed the petition as having been rendered 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.
2024:PHHC:010759
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
262
CRM-M-690-2021 (O&M) Date of Decision : 25.01.2024
JAGDISH PRASAD …..Petitioner(s)
Versus
STATE OF HARYANA AND ANOTHER
.....Respondent(s)
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ JAIN
Present : Mr. Shashikant Gupta, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Ashok Kumar Sehrawat, DAG, Haryana.
PANKAJ JAIN, J. ( ORAL )
25.01.2024 ( PANKAJ JAIN ) Deepak Patwal JUDGE
NOTE: Whether speaking/non-speaking: Speaking Whether reportable: YES/NO
Deepak Patwal 2024.01.30 09:49 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document chandigarh
Jagdish Prasad
State of Haryana
Another
Pankaj Jain
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
