State Of Haryana & Anr. vs G. Raman & Ors.

*      IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+          W.P.(C) No. 6834/2010 & CM Nos. 13524/2010 &
           20254/2010

%                                Date of Decision: 10.03.2011

STATE OF HARYANA & ANR.                                 ..... Petitioners
                   Through :          Mr. Neeraj K. Jain, Sr. Advocate
                                      with Ms. Anubha Agarwal, Advocate

                   versus

G. RAMAN & ORS.                                        ..... Respondents
                         Through :    Mr. Dinesh C. Pandey, Advocate

CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE VEENA BIRBAL

1.    Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed
      to see the judgment ? No
2.    To be referred to the Reporter or not? No
3.    Whether the judgment should be reported in Digest? No

ANIL KUMAR, J.

The learned counsel for the petitioners, on instructions, states that both the charge sheets have now been withdrawn and, therefore, the petition has become infructuous.

The learned counsel for the respondents does not refute the contention raised on behalf of the petitioners.

In the circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of as infructuous. Parties are left to bear their own costs.

All the pending applications are also disposed of.

ANIL KUMAR, J.

VEENA BIRBAL, J.

MARCH 10, 2011 kks