The Hon'ble Court, relying on the Full Bench judgment in Km. Rachna and another, held the habeas corpus writ petition not maintainable. The petition is dismissed as not pressed.
Writ petition dismissed as not maintainable.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 47
Case :- HABEAS CORPUS WRIT PETITION No. - 558 of 2021
Petitioner :- Smt. Preeti And Another Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Petitioner :- Sunil Kumar Yadav Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J. Hon'ble Ram Krishna Gautam,J.
At the very outset, learned A.G.A. raised a preliminary objection regarding maintainability of the writ petition in view of the law laid down by Full Bench of this Court in Km. Rachna and another vs. State of U.P. and 4 others (Habeas Corpus Writ Petition No. 362 of 2020, decided on 8.3.2021)
In view of the aforesaid dictum, we are of the considered opinion that the writ petition is not maintainable and the same is hereby dismissed as not pressed.
Order Date :- 25.8.2021 Dhirendra/
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the writ petition is maintainable in light of the Full Bench judgment in Km. Rachna.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Km. Rachna and another vs. State of U.P. and 4 othersRelied on¶5
Km. Rachna and another vs. State of U.P. and 4 others (Habeas Corpus Writ Petition No. 362 of 2020, decided on 8.3.2021)
Smt. Preeti And Another
State of U.P. and Another
Mahesh Chandra Tripathi
Ram Krishna Gautam
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
