Rahul Parikh v. the State
Case brief
What is this about?
Petitioner's bail application dismissed for non-prosecution as he was missing, no instructions were received from him, and a habeas corpus petition had been filed.
What did the court decide?
Petition dismissed for non-prosecution due to petitioner's absence and lack of instructions.
What the court decided
$~1
- IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
- BAIL APPLN. 2152/2014 & Crl. M.A.Nos. 14261/15, 15161/14 & 5895/15
RAHUL PARIKH ..... Petitioner
Through Mr. Mukul Talwar, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Sunil Kumar and Mr. Ankit Dixit,Advocate versus
THE STATE ..... Respondent
Through Mr. Raghvinder Verma, APP Mr. Jitender Jain, Advocate for complainant
C ORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.P.GARG O R D E R
% 12.01.2016
Mr. Mukul Talwar, learned Senior Advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that no instructions have been received from the petitioner.
It is informed that the petitioner is missing and the habeas corpus petition has been filed.
Issues for consideration
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the bail application should be dismissed due to non-appearance of the petitioner and non-receipt of instructions.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
RAHUL PARIKH
- respondent
THE STATE
Coram
S.P. GARG
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court