Dismissed
Bahadur Ram Tamta v. Sate of Uttarakhand
Uttarakhand HCCRLR/70/2009
Case brief
from the order text
What is this about?
Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings…
What the court decided
AI extract
Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings…
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.
| SL. No |
Date | Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures |
COURT’S OR JUDGES’S ORDERS |
|---|---|---|---|
| CRLR No.70 of 2009 Hon’ble R.C. Khulbe, J. Mr. Prem Kaushal, learned counsel holding brief of Mr. B.M. Pingal, learned counsel for the revisionist. Ms. Shivangi Gangwar, learned B.H. for the State. Mr. H.C. Pandey, learned counsel for the private respondent. It is submitted by learned counsel for the revisionist that he does not want to pursue the revision and withdraws the same. In view of the above submission, the present criminal revision is dismissed as withdrawn. |
|||
| (R.C. Khulbe, J.) 22.10.2021 Sukhbant |
B.M. Pingal
State
Private Respondent
R.C. Khulbe
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court