Santokh Singh v. State Of Punjab And ORS

CRWP No. 298 of 2020 -1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRWP No. 298 of 2020 (O&M) Date of decision : 27.7.2021 ...

Santokh Singh ................Petitioner vs.

State of Punjab and others .................Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice H. S. Madaan Present: None for the petitioner.

Mr. J.S. Ghuman, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab.

...

H. S. Madaan, J. (Oral) Case taken up through video conferencing.

Written reply filed on behalf of the State, be taken on record. There is no representation on behalf of the petitioner. Similar was the position on the last date of hearing. Learned State counsel has pointed out that the FIR number mentioned in the petition is not correct, in as much as, the FIR no. mentioned as 93 dated 28.8.1996, is under Section 61 of the Punjab Excise Act, 1914, Police Station Mahilpur and the present petitioner is not accused in the said case, rather accused is some woman. BANITA CHUGH 2021.07.27 12:04 I agree to specified portions of this document

CRWP No. 298 of 2020 -2Under the circumstances, the petitioner having gone unrepresented on two successive dates of hearing, including today itself, shows that the petitioner is not interested in further prosecution of the petition. The same stands dismissed for non-prosecution. ( H.S. Madaan ) 27.7.2021 Judge chugh Whether speaking / reasoned Yes / No Whether reportable Yes / No BANITA CHUGH 2021.07.27 12:04 I agree to specified portions of this document