Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Punjab and Haryana · body

2025 DAILYLAW 58664 (PNJ)

PRATIMA v. STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS

CRM-M/27292/2025 · 2025-08-04

Manisha Batra

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA 131 PRATIMA STATE OF HARYANA CORAM: HON’BLE MRS. Present : None Mr. Apoorv Garg, Sr. D.A.G., Haryana. MANISHA BATRA Learned State counsel who has appeared on advance notice of the petition, submits that offences under Sections 118(2) and 238 of BNS has added and challan has been presented before the learned trial Court on 09.05.2025. There is no representation on behalf of the petitioner despite the fact that the matter has been passed over twice. It appears that the petitioner is not intereste petition any more. Hence, the same is dismissed for want of prosecution. 19.05.2025 Jyoti-IV IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M Date of decision: Versus STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA None for the petitioner. Mr. Apoorv Garg, Sr. D.A.G., Haryana. **** MANISHA BATRA, J. (oral) Learned State counsel who has appeared on advance notice of the petition, submits that offences under Sections 118(2) and 238 of BNS has added and challan has been presented before the learned trial Court on There is no representation on behalf of the petitioner despite the fact that the matter has been passed over twice. It appears that the petitioner is not intereste petition any more. Hence, the same is dismissed for want of prosecution. (MANISHA BATRA) Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No. Whether reportable : Yes/No IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH M No.27292 of 2025 Date of decision: 19.05.2025 …. Petitioner Versus …. Respondents MANISHA BATRA Mr. Apoorv Garg, Sr. D.A.G., Haryana. Learned State counsel who has appeared on advance notice of the petition, submits that offences under Sections 118(2) and 238 of BNS has been added and challan has been presented before the learned trial Court on There is no representation on behalf of the petitioner despite the It appears that the petitioner is not interested to pursue the present petition any more. Hence, the same is dismissed for want of prosecution. (MANISHA BATRA) JUDGE Yes/No. Yes/No Learned State counsel who has appeared on advance notice of the been added and challan has been presented before the learned trial Court on There is no representation on behalf of the petitioner despite the d to pursue the present Jyoti 2025.05.20 17:28 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document