A single-paragraph order in a writ petition where the petitioner is not named in the text. The court dismissed the petition as infructuous upon being informed that the investigation was complete and a final report was submitted by the investigating officer.
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| WPCRL No.352 of 2020 Hon’ble R.C. Khulbe, J. Mr. V.S. Chauhan, learned counsel for the petitioners. Mr. Kuldeep Rawal, learned A.G.A. for the State. It is informed by the learned State Counsel that on completion of investigation, final report has been submitted by the I.O. in the matter. In view of the above, the writ petition has become infructuous. Accordingly, the instant petition is dismissed as having become infructuous. |
|||
| (R.C. Khulbe, J.) 08.09.2021 BS |
Petitioner(s)
State
R.C. Khulbe
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
