The High Court of Delhi dismissed a writ petition as withdrawn. The withdrawal was accepted based on an undertaking by the mother of the first petitioner not to threaten or harass the second petitioner regarding their relationship.
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.
$~51
TARUNA & ANR ..... Petitioners
Through: Mr. Sanjai Premi and Mr. Mohd. Yusuf, Advocates
versus
THE STATE (NCT OF DELHI) & ORS ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Ashish Aggarwal, ASC (Criminal) and Ms. Nandita Rao, ASC (Criminal) for R-1 to R-3 Mr. Manish Kumar, Advocate with Mr. Amit Kumar and Mr. Mohit Arora, Advocates for R-4 & R-5
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SIDDHARTH MRIDUL O R D E R
% 22.01.2016
In view of the circumstance that Mrs. Sunita, mother of Taruna, the petitioner No.1 herein, has undertaken not to threaten or harass the latter qua her relationship with Mr. Jyoti Singh, petitioner No.2 herein, counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners seeks leave to withdraw this petition. The undertaking given by Mrs. Sunita, mother of the petitioner No.1 herein, is accepted.
The writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn and disposed of accordingly. Pending application also stands disposed of.
Dasti .
SIDDHARTH MRIDUL, J
JANUARY 22, 2016
dn
TARUNA & ANR
THE STATE (NCT OF DELHI) & ORS
SIDDHARTH MRIDUL
As recorded by the court registry
A constitutional writ petition in a criminal context, most commonly habeas corpus or a challenge to an FIR or detention order.
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
