Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Uttarakhand · body

2025 DAILYLAW 9461 (UTT)

SUNIL NAGAR v. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

WPCRL/1879/2020 · 2025-06-27

Pankaj Purohit

body2025

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.1879 of 2020 Hon’ble Pankaj Purohit, J. Mr. Maneesh Bisht, Advocate holding brief of Mr. Vipul Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner. 2. Mr. S.C. Dumka, A.G.A. with Ms. S.B. Dobhal, B.H. for the State. 3. Mr. Himanshu Pal, Advocate for private respondent. 4. It is contended by counsel for the State, on instructions, that after investigation a final report has been submitted in favour of the petitioner, which is not disputed by counsel for the petitioner. 5. In view of the statement made by counsel for the State, nothing remains to be decided in the writ petition. 6. Accordingly writ petition is closed. (Pankaj Purohit, J.) 27.06.2025 SK