Single-judge High Court held that the criminal writ petition was rendered infructuous upon the filing of a charge-sheet against the writ petitioners and was dismissed accordingly while allowing an interim order to continue temporarily.
Writ petition dismissed as infructuous; interim order continued until charge-sheet submission.
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.
WPCRL No. 277 of 2013 Hon’ble U.C.Dhyani, J.
Mr. Vipul Sharma, Advocate, present for the writ petitioners.
Mr. V. K. Jemini, learned Deputy Advocate General, assisted by Mr. S.S.Adhikari, Brief Holder, present for the State.
Learned counsel for the State submitted that charge-sheet has been filed against the writ petitioners. In view of the above development, the criminal writ petition has rendered infructuous. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed as infructuous. Interim order dated 20.03.2013 will continue to operate till the submission of the charge-sheet before the Court concerned and no further.
(U.C.Dhyani, J.) 07.04.2015
Kaushal
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the writ petition rendered infructuous due to the filing of a charge-sheet against the petitioners.
Writ Petitioners
State
U.C. Dhyani
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
