The petitioner filed a writ petition seeking directions for legal action and restraining orders against specific respondents. In the absence of the petitioner's appearance, the High Court dismissed the petition for non-prosecution.
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
SMT SOMA SURI ..... Petitioner Through: None
versus
STATE (NCT) OF DELHI & ORS ..... Respondents Through: Mr.R.S.Kundu, ASC for the State with Mr.Vishesh Wadhwan, Advocate with SI Manohar Lal PS Rajouri Garden
CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE PRATIBHA RANI
CRL.M.A.17010/2015
Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
Application stands disposed of.
(i) to issue directions to respondent Nos.1 to 4 to take legal action against the respondent Nos.5 and 6;
(ii) to issue directions to respondent No.1 to 4 to restrain the respondent Nos.5 and 6 not to create any nuisance and hindrance against the petitioner as well as not to dispossess & interfere in the possession of petitioner from her residential premises.
W.P.(CRL) 2676/2015
Page 1 of 2
PRATIBHA RANI, J.
JANUARY 18, 2016 ‘pg’
W.P.(CRL) 2676/2015
Page 2 of 2
1 issue framed by the court
Whether to grant the petitioner's prayers for legal action and injunction against respondents.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Articles 226 and 21 of the Constitution of India read with Section 482 of Cr.P.C.Referred¶14
Smt Soma Suri
State (NCT) of Delhi & Ors
Pratibha Rani
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
