CHINTAN PRAVIN KUMAR YAGNIK v. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND
C482/738/2024 · 2025-04-28
Pankaj Purohit
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 6049 (UTT) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 6049 (UTT) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
SL. No Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGES’S ORDERS
C482 No.738 of 2024 Hon’ble Pankaj Purohit, J.
Mr. Sahil Mullick, learned counsel for the applicant.
2. Mr. Bhaskar Chandra Joshi, learned AGA for the State.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant on instructions would submit that after investigation, final report has been submitted in the present case.
4. In view of the subsequent development, this C482 application has become infructuous and the same is dismissed as such.
(Pankaj Purohit J.)
28.04.2025 Ravi