Heman Rawat v. Pardeep Kumar & Anr.
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
Key paragraphs
- Para 33. In view of the above, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that grievance of the petitioner does not survive. Thus, he prays for withdrawal of the present petition.
Judgment
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS SURI ---- Present: Mr. A.V.S Parmar, Advocate for Mr. Sanjiv Kumar Aggarwal, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Praveen Kumar, Deputy Advocate General, Haryana. VIKAS SURI, J. (Oral) ****
This petition has been filed for initiating proceedings under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, for alleged wilful disobedience of order dated
06.04.2026 (Annexure P-1), passed by this Court in CWP-10163-2026.
At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the aforesaid order has since been substantially complied with and the petitioner is satisfied with an alternate number assigned to him, by the authorities concerned.
In view of the above, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that grievance of the petitioner does not survive. Thus, he prays for withdrawal of the present petition.
Learned State counsel appearing for respondents affirms the factum of order dated 06.04.2026 having been substantially complied with.
In view of the aforesaid, no useful purpose would be served by continuing with the present petition.
Dismissed as withdrawn. Rule stands discharged. July 21, 2026 Varinder (VIKAS SURI) JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No
Questions this judgment answers
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Punjab & Haryana High Court, on 21 Jul 2026. The bench was VIKAS SURI.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.