Petitioner sought to withdraw his petition; counsel for the petitioner stated he was instructed to withdraw it, and the High Court dismissed the petition as withdrawn.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.
215 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
CRM-M-9659-2024 Date of Decision: October 01, 2024
Madan @ Titu
…Pe--oner
Versus
State of Haryana …Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK GUPTA
Present: - Mr. Ni�n Kadian, Advocate for Mr. Rakesh Lathwal, Advocate for the pe��oner.
Mr. R.K.S. Brar, Addl. A.G., Haryana.
DEEPAK GUPTA, J.(Oral)
Learned counsel for the pe��oner submits that he is under instruc�on from the arguing counsel Mr. Rakesh Lathwal, to withdraw this pe��on.
In view of the aforesaid statement made by learned counsel for the pe��oner, present pe��on is hereby dismissed as withdrawn.
October 01, 2024 (DEEPAK GUPTA) sarita JUDGE Whether reasoned/speaking: Yes/No Whether reportable: Yes/No
Sarita Rani 2024.10.02 23:26 I attest to the accuracy of this document/order
Madan @ Titu
State of Haryana
Deepak Gupta
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
