BHAGWAT SINGH BISHT AND ANR v. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND
WPCRL/7/2025 · 2025-03-26
Pankaj Purohit
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 714 (UTT) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 714 (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
WPCRL No.7 of 2025 Hon’ble Pankaj Purohit, J.
Mr. J.S. Bangare, Advocate for the petitioners.
2. Mr. B.C. Joshi, A.G.A. with Ms. S.B. Dobhal, 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 been submitted in the matter on 25.02.2025, which is not disputed by
learned counsel for the petitioners.
4. In view of the statement so made by learned counsel for the State, nothing remains to be decided in the present writ petition.
5. Accordingly, writ petition is dismissed as infructuous with a liberty to the petitioners to challenge the charge sheet before appropriate forum.
(Pankaj Purohit, J.)
26.03.2025 SK