Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Punjab and Haryana · body

2025 DAILYLAW 93631 (PNJ)

CHETAN GOYAL v. STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS

CWP/24416/2025 · 2025-08-22

Kuldeep Tiwari

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA Chetan Goyal State of Punjab CORAM: Present: KULDEEP TIWARI 1. refer to any infirmity in the impugned order, and also confronted him with the fact that the application moved by him, under the Right to Information Act, is totally vague. However, he is unable to satisfy the Court, and to file a fresh application, particular which the information is required 2. 22.08.202 Ak Sharma IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Chetan Goyal Versus Punjab and others CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP TIWARI Petitioner in person. (Through Video Conferencing) Mr. Sahil R. Bakshi, AAG, Punjab. **** KULDEEP TIWARI, J. (Oral) At the outset, this Court has pointedly any infirmity in the impugned order, and also confronted him with the fact that the application moved by him, under the Right to Information Act, is totally vague. However, he is unable to satisfy the Court, and seeks permission to withdraw the instant petition, with liberty to file a fresh application, seeking specific information from the particular Police Station and also mention which the information is required. Dismissed as withdrawn, with the liberty as aforesaid .2025 Whether speaking/reasoned Whether reportable IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-24416-2025 Date of decision: 22.08.2025 ….Petitioner ….Respondents KULDEEP TIWARI (Through Video Conferencing) Mr. Sahil R. Bakshi, AAG, Punjab. pointedly asked the petitioner to any infirmity in the impugned order, and also confronted him with the fact that the application moved by him, under the Right to Information Act, is totally vague. However, he is unable to satisfy the ission to withdraw the instant petition, with liberty seeking specific information from the also mention therein, the relevant period, for with the liberty as aforesaid. (KULDEEP TIWARI) JUDGE Yes/No Yes/No 5 ….Respondents asked the petitioner to any infirmity in the impugned order, and also confronted him with the fact that the application moved by him, under the Right to Information Act, is totally vague. However, he is unable to satisfy the ission to withdraw the instant petition, with liberty seeking specific information from the , for AMIT KUMAR 2025.08.23 15:55 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document