Fateh Singh v. State
Case brief
What is this about?
The petitioner submitted that investigations were transferred to the Crime Branch vide order dated 15 July 2016. The court disposed of the writ petition as not pressed. No adjudication on merits occurred.
What did the court decide?
Writ petition disposed of as not pressed.
What the court decided
$~10
- IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
- W.P.(CRL) 1291/2016 FATEH SINGH ..... Petitioner Through : Mr. Mudit Gupta, Proxy counsel
versus
STATE ..... Respondent Through :Mr. Jamal Akhtar, Adv. for Mr. Rahul Mehra, Standing Counsel with Inspector A.K. Singh, SHO, Ghazipur and SI Mohd. Faizan Ghazi
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. PATHAK
O R D E R % 27.07.2016
Learned proxy counsel for the petitioner submits that since
investigations have already been transferred to the Crime Branch of Delhi Police vide order dated 15th July, 2016 passed in W.P.(Crl.) No. 2019/2016, petitioner is not willing to pursue this writ petition any further. Writ petition is disposed of as not pressed.
A.K. PATHAK, J.
JULY 27, 2016 rb
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
Fateh Singh
- respondent
State
Coram
A.K. Pathak
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court