Criminal writ petition concerning parole was withdrawn by the petitioner. The court permitted withdrawal, observed the petitioner may file a fresh parole application disclosing his proposed residence address, and directed the competent authority to decide it by a speaking order within three weeks.
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
101
CRWP-4059-2024(O&M) Date of Decision: 21.05.2024
Gopal Dass
....Petitioner
Versus
State of Haryana and others
....Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESHWAR THAKUR
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE LALIT BATRA
----
Present: Mr. Ritesh Tomar, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Saurabh Mago, Deputy Advocate General, Haryana.
Sureshwar Thakur, J. (Oral)
(SURESHWAR THAKUR) JUDGE
21.05.2024 (LALIT BATRA) d.gulati JUDGE
Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No
DIWAKER GULATI 2024.05.21 17:31 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
Gopal Dass
State of Haryana
Sureshwar Thakur
Lalit Batra
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
