Research › Search › Judgment

Punjab High Court · body

2006 DIGILAW 481 (PNJ)

Dildar Singh v. U. T. Chandigarh

2006-02-15

ADARSH KUMAR GOEL

body2006
Judgment 1. Counsel for the State says that custody of the petitioner is not required for investigation. 2. In view of the above statement, this petition is dismissed as infructuous. However, if custody of the petitioner is required in future, a notice of two weeks in advance will be given.