SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AMIT KUMAR – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANR – Respondent


IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH

Criminal Revision No.206 of 2015

Date of Decision: 03.12.2015

Amit Kumar

...Petitioner(s)

Versus

State of Punjab & another

...Respondent(s)

CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARI PAL VERMA

1. Whether reporters of local newspapers may be allowed to see

judgment?

2. To be referred to reporters or not?

3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?

Present:- Mr. Ashok Giri, Advocate

for the petitioner.

Mr. Gurinderjit Singh, DAG, Punjab.

Mr. Vivek Goel, Advocate

for respondent no.2.

*****

HARI PAL VERMA J.(Oral)

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that since the

matter has been finally decided by the trial Court, the present

petition may be disposed of as having been rendered infructuous.

Ordered accordingly.

December 03, 2015

( HARI PAL VERMA )

AK

JUDGE

ASHWANI KUMAR

2015.12.04 10:43

I attest to the accuracy and

integrity of this document

High Court Chandigarh

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top