Date Office Notes, reports, orders or…
Writ petition dismissed as infructuous following submission of charge sheet.
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.951 of 2020 Hon’ble Pankaj Purohit, J. Ms. Nishra Bora, Advocate for the petitioner. 2. Mr. Vipul Painuly, B.H. for the State. 3. Learned counsel for the State made a statement at bar that the writ petition has rendered infructuous as charge sheet has already been submitted in the matter on 03.03.2025, which is not disputed by learned counsel for the petitioner. 4. In view of the statement so made by learned counsel for the State, the writ petition is dismissed as infructuous. |
||
| (Pankaj Purohit, J.) 11.03.2025 SK |
Petitioner
State
Pankaj Purohit
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
