Single-judge oral order dismissing a writ petition. The court refused an adjournment prayer and dismissed the petition filed to coerce police action, noting disputed facts and lack of petitioner's locus standi.
The prayer for adjournment was declined. The writ petition was dismissed.
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.
$~9
MOHD. ISRAR ..... Petitioner
Through: Petitioner in person.
versus
THE STATE AND ORS ..... Respondent
Through: Mr. Rajeshwar Rao and Mr.
Charanjeet Singh, Advocates for R-1,
2, 4 to 7, 9 to 11 with respondents.
Mr. Sachin, Advocate for R-3 and R-
8
Mr. Nikhil Majithia, Advocate for R-
12
% Date of Decision: 19 th February, 2016
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN
J U D G M E N T
MANMOHAN, J: (Oral)
W.P.(C) 3683/2011
Page 1 of 2
MANMOHAN, J
FEBRUARY 19, 2016 rs
W.P.(C) 3683/2011
Page 2 of 2
2 issues framed by the court
Whether to entertain a writ petition filed to coerce police from taking action against the petitioner's brother.
Whether the petitioner has locus standi to seek compensation for false cases registered against his brother.
MOHD. ISRAR
THE STATE
Manmohan
As recorded by the court registry
A petition under Article 226 of the Constitution asking a High Court to issue a writ against the State or a public authority in a civil matter.
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
