IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.2922 of 2024 Date of Decision: 30.09.2026 _______________________________________________________ Bharat Kumar …….Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & others … Respondents _______________________________________________________ Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? 1 For the Petitioner: None for the petitioner. For the Respondents: Mr. Rajan Kahol & Mr. Vishal Panwar, Additional Advocate Generals with Mr. Ravi Chauhan & Mr. Anish Banshtu, Deputy Advocates General. ____________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, Judge(oral): Despite repeated pass overs, none has come present on behalf of the petitioner. 2. Careful perusal of previous orders passed by this Court suggests that the petitioner is not interested to prosecute the case further. Initially, matter was listed before this Court on 01.05.2024, on which date, none came on behalf of the petitioner. However, taking a lenient view, matter came to be adjourned to 15.05.2024. On 15.05.2024, Mr. Anupam Anzranni Mehta, Advocate put in appearance. Again on 24.07.2024, none appeared on behalf of the petitioner, however, no adverse order was passed. 1Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 2. Today, matter was repeatedly passed over, but none has come present and as such, this Court has every reason to believe and presume that the petitioner is no more interested to prosecute his case and as such, same is dismissed for non prosecution. (Sandeep Sharma), Judge September 30,2026 (shankar)