Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Uttarakhand · body

2025 DAILYLAW 9612 (UTT)

NAVNEET BANSAL v. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

WPCRL/831/2024 · 2025-07-02

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.831 of 2024 With WPCRL No.839 of 2024 Hon’ble Pankaj Purohit, J. Ms. Stuti Pandey, Advocate holding brief of Mr. Ramji Shrivastava, Advocate for the petitioner(s). 2. Mr. S.S. Chauhan, D.A.G. with Mr. Vikas Uniyal, B.H. for the State. 3. Mr. Harshit Sanwal, Advocate for respondent no.3. 4. State counsel, on instructions, which are taken on record, submitted that after investigation a charge sheet dated 23.06.2025 has been submitted against the petitioner(s), which is not disputed by counsel for the petitioner(s). 5. In view of the submission made by counsel for the parties, writ petition is dismissed as infructuous; however it is open to the petitioner(s) to challenge the said charge sheet before appropriate forum under appropriate provision of law. (Pankaj Purohit, J.) 02.07.2025 SK