IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA CWPOA No. 911 of 2019 Decided on: 30.10.2025 ____________________________________________________________ Dr. Barjinder Kumar Marwaha …Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and others …Respondents Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ranjan Sharma, Judge 1 Whether approved for reporting? For the petitioner: Mr. Neel Kamal Sood, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Vasu Sood, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. Hemant Verma, Deputy Advocate General, for respondents No. 1 to 4. Mr. Lokendar Paul Thakur, Senior Penal Counsel, for respondent No. 5. Ranjan Sharma, Judge Learned Senior Counsel on instructions of Mr. Vasu Sood, Advocate, and the communication received from the petitioner [Taken on Record] states that the petitioner does not intend to continue with the instant petition, in view of the fact that the case is stated to have been settled/solved. 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? - 2 - [Statement is taken on record]. Based on the above Statement as well as the communication, the instant proceedings are given a closure. In above scenario, the instant petition is closed and is disposed of accordingly. In aforesaid terms, pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of accordingly. (Ranjan Sharma) Judge October 30, 2025 (tm)