Vichattar & ORS v. State Of Haryana & ORS

CRM-M-26051-2015 (O&M) -1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-26051-2015 (O&M) Date of Decision: September 21, 2015 Vichattar and others .....Petitioners

Versus

State of Haryana and another ......Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NARESH KUMAR SANGHI

Present:

Mr.Sumit Gupta, Advocate for the petitioners.

Mr.Pawan Gaur, DAG, Haryana.

........

1.

Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?

2.

To be referred to the Reporters or not ?

3.

Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? NARESH KUMAR SANGHI, J.(Oral) Learned counsel contends that in compliance of the directions issued vide order dated 07.08.2015, the petitioners did appear before the Court below and were granted ad-interim bail vide order dated 02.09.2015. In support of his contention, he has produced the certified copy of the order, dated 02.09.2015, passed by learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sonepat, and a photostat copy of the statement suffered by the MEENU 2015.09.22 09:39 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document chandigarh

CRM-M-26051-2015 (O&M) -2complainant, Sujata, before learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Kharkhoda, which are taken on record. He, however, submits that the present petition has been rendered infructuous since the main case in which the petitioners have been granted ad-interim bail has been withdrawn by the complainant-Sujata. Learned counsel for the State has no objection to the above statement of the learned counsel for the petitioners. Ordered accordingly.

September 21, 2015 (NARESH KUMAR SANGHI) meenu JUDGE MEENU 2015.09.22 09:39 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document chandigarh