SURAJ SHARMA AND OTHERS v. STATE OF HARYANA AND ANOTHER
CRM-M/15099/2026 · 2026-04-10
Mandeep Pannu
body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 1099 (PNJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 1099 (PNJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
120
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
CRM-M No.15099 of 2026
Date of decision: 10.04.2026
Suraj Sharma and others
…Petitioners
Versus
State of Haryana and another
…Respondent
CORAM:
HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE MANDEEP PANNU
Present :- None for the petitioners.
Mr. Sushil Kumar Bhardwaj, Addl. A.G., Haryana.
None for respondent No.2.
***** MANDEEP PANNU, J. (Oral)
1.
There is no representation on behalf of the petitioners as well as respondent No.2.
2.
On the last date of hearing, none was present on behalf of the petitioners.
3.
Accordingly, the present petition is dismissed for want of prosecution.
4.
All pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of.
(MANDEEP PANNU) 10.04.2026
JUDGE neetu Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No
Whether Reportable:
Yes/No
NEETU RANI 2026.04.10 14:37 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment PHHC, CHD