Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Uttarakhand · body

2025 DAILYLAW 9622 (UTT)

ARJUN PANWAR AND ANR v. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

WPCRL/832/2024 · 2025-07-01

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.832 of 2024 Hon’ble Pankaj Purohit, J. Mr. Sachin Panwar, Advocate for the petitioners. 2. Mr. S.S. Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General for the State. 3. Learned counsel for the State on instructions would submit that after investigation, charge-sheet has been submitted against the petitioners. 4. This fact has not been disputed by the learned counsel for the petitioners as well. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that he would challenge the charge-sheet in the appropriate proceedings before this Court. 6. In view of the statement made by learned counsel for the parties, this writ petition has become infructuous and the same is dismissed as infructuous. 7. However, it is open to the petitioner to challenge the charge-sheet in appropriate proceedings, before the appropriate forum. 8. Pending application, if any, stands disposed of accordingly. (Pankaj Purohit J.) 01.07.2025 Ravi