Where the trial concluded prior to the hearing of the revision petition, the High Court held the petition to be infructuous and dismissed it. No substantive legal ground was discussed.
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 for the States of Punjab and Haryana At Chandigarh
CRR-4867-2017 (O&M) Date of Decision:- 27.11.2024
Saroj … Petitioner
Versus
State of Haryana and another
... Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GURVINDER SINGH GILL
Present:Mr. Arjun Sheoran, Advocate, for the petitioner.
Mr. Munish Sharma, DAG, Haryana.
GURVINDER SINGH GILL, J . (Oral)
Today, at the very outset, learned counsel for the petitioner
submits that the trial has already been concluded.
In view of the aforestated position, the instant revision petition
is dismissed having been rendered infructuous.
27.11.2024 (GURVINDER SINGH GILL) mohan JUDGE Whether speaking /reasoned Yes / No Whether Reportable Yes / No
MOHAN SINGH 2024.11.27 17:09 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court, Chandigarh
Saroj
State of Haryana
Gurvinder Singh Gill
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
