Punjab and Haryana High Court

CRM-M/61434/2025 of SANDEEP KUMAR @ DEVI Vs STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS. on 20 July 2026

Cites 0, Cited by 0

COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-61434-2025 Date of Decision: 20.07.2026 SANDEEP KUMAR @ DEVI ... Petitioner(s) Versus STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS. ...Respondent(s) CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASJIT SINGH BEDI Present: Mr. A.S. Dhindsa, Advocate for the petitioner(s). Mr. Yadwinder

Citations and Judicial Treatment

No citing decisions in the index yet

Cited by

0

Decisions in the index citing it

Cites

0

Decisions referred to

In this index

0

Of the decisions it cites

Overruled / Questioned

0

No negative treatment found

Loading the citing and cited decisions…

289 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

CRM-M-61434-2025 Date of Decision: 20.07.2026 SANDEEP KUMAR @ DEVI

... Petitioner(s) Versus STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS. ...Respondent(s) CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASJIT SINGH BEDI Present: Mr. A.S. Dhindsa, Advocate for the petitioner(s). Mr. Yadwinder Singh, AAG, Punjab.

**** JASJIT SINGH BEDI, J. (Oral) The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he wishes to withdraw the present petition at this stage. Ordered accordingly.

(JASJIT SINGH BEDI) JUDGE July 20, 2026 vishal Whether speaking/reasoned:- Yes/No Whether reportable:- Yes/No VISHAL SETHI 2026.07.21 16:57 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

You have used today's free searches. Sign in, for free, to keep searching without a limit.

Compass reads the judgments for you and finds the paragraphs for and against your question. Sign in to use it.

My Vault follows judgments for you and records every later decision that cites them. Sign in to keep one.

Sign in to download the court's PDF. The full text stays free to read here.

Sign in, for free, to download the court copy. Reading the full text here stays open to everyone.

Search and read Indian judgments without limits, save them to My Vault and find the relevant paragraphs with Compass.

Open the sign-in page instead