Raj Kumar Joon And ANR v. State Of Haryana And ANR

CRM-M-27432-2018 --1--

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CRM-M-27432-2018 DATE OF DECISION:-08.03.2019 RAJ KUMAR JOON AND ANR.

...PETITIONERS...

V.

STATE OF HARYANA AND ANR.

...RESPONDENTS...

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAMENDRA JAIN Present: Mr. Pankaj Kaushik, Advocate for Mr. Rakesh Nehra, Advocate, for the petitioners.

**** RAMENDRA JAIN, J. (ORAL) A written request for adjournment has been circulated on behalf of learned counsel for the petitioner.

However, perusal of file shows that this petition was filed on 02.07.2018 and for the first time, it was taken on board on 05.07.2018. On that date, learned arguing counsel had sought adjournment on account of illness of his father. Consequently, case was adjourned to 09.01.2019, on which date also, learned counsel for the petitioners sought adjournment. Therefore, the case was adjourned for today.

From the above factual aspect, it is evident that from the very date of filing the instant petition in July 2018, repeated adjournments are sought by learned counsel for the petitioners, either one pretext or other for the reasons best known to him.

SONIKA 2019.03.09 06:53 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

CRM-M-27432-2018 --2-- Considering this aspect of the matter, written request circulated on behalf of the petitioners is rejected.

At this stage, learned proxy counsel for the petitioners prays for withdrawal of instant petition.

Dismissed as withdrawn.

08.03.2019 (RAMENDRA JAIN) sonika JUDGE whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes/No whether reportable:

Yes/No SONIKA 2019.03.09 06:53 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh