STATE OF HARYANA Vs. SUBHASH CHANDER DUTT (DEAD)

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Leave granted.

(2.) We have heard learned Solicitor General appearing for the appellant/State and Shri Sanjay Khanna, learned counsel for the respondent(s) at length.

(3.) During the course of submissions, learned Solicitor General appearing for the appellant/State contended that in fact CRM-M No.2763/2025 had been rendered infructuous on the date the matter was taken up by the High Court inasmuch as the petitioner before the High Court seeking bail had since deceased owing to medical reasons. In the circumstances, the said matter had been rendered infructuous. The High Court could have simply disposed of the case by recording the same. However, the High Court by a lengthy order has indicted the State which was represented by learned Additional Advocate General. In the circumstances, the State has been constrained to file This appeal to seek expunging of the observations of the High Court as against the State and/or learned Additional Advocate General, who represented the State.