← Library
High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRR/380/2006dismissed

Rattan Lal v. Ganga Ram And ANR

2015-09-23Mr. Justice S.C. Malte3 pages

-1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: September 23, 2015 Rattan Lal .....Petitioner

Versus

Ganga Ram and another ......Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NARESH KUMAR SANGHI

Present:

Mr.P.R.Yadav, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr.Aman Chaudhary, Advocate for respondent No.1-applicant.

Mr.Kuldeep Tiwari, Addl.A.G.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) CRM-31382-2015 After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and going through the contents of the application, respondent No.1applicant is exempted from filing the certified copies of the

-2documents, Annexures A-1(Colly) and A-2.

CRM disposed of.

CRM-31383-2015 Prayer in this application is for placing on record the documents, Annexures A-1 (Colly) and A-2.

After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, the documents, Annexures A-1(Colly) and A-2 are taken on record subject to all just exceptions.

CRM disposed of.

CRR-380-2006 At the very outset, Mr.P.R.Yadav, learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that on the last date of hearing he had seen the physical condition of respondent No.1-accused; he has also gone through the photographs as well as the medical evidence, Annexures A-1(colly) and A-2 produced on record and the fact that respondent No.1-accused was terminated from the service, he does not press the petition on merits. He further prays that he may be permitted to withdraw the present petition. Learned counsel for respondent No.1-accused as well as the learned counsel for the State has no objection to the prayer of Mr.P.R.Yadav, representing the petitioner-informant.

-3After considering the stand of the learned counsel for the parties and perusing the material available on record, this Court also finds substance in the submissions put forward by learned counsel for the petitioner.

The petitioner is permitted to withdraw the present petition.

So ordered.

September 23, 2015 (NARESH KUMAR SANGHI) meenu JUDGE