Petitioner flagged missing husband but chose not to proceed with the petition, reserving the right to seek appropriate legal remedies.
Petition disposed of as petitioner declined to press it further.
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.
$~12
| * | IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI |
|---|---|
| + | W.P.(CRL) 2947/2015 |
| BARKHA ..... Petitioner |
|
| Through:Mr.Vineet Jain, Advocate versus STATE (GNCT OF DELHI) & ORS THROUGH ITS PROSECUTOR ..... Respondent Through:Mr.Rahul Mehra, Standing Counsel with Mr.Amrit Singh and Mr. Shekhar Budakoti, |
|
| Advocates with Inspector Sanjeev Kumar and S.I. Rajesh Kumar PS Kashmere Gate. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL O R D E R |
|
| % 02.02.2016 |
Husband of the petitioner is missing since 14th September, 2015. Husband of the petitioner has appeared in Court and submits that he is staying with parent on account of a matrimonial dispute and he does not wish to reside with her wife.
The petitioner, at this stage does not wish to press this petition as she submits that she will take appropriate remedies in accordance with law.
Petition is disposed of.
G.S.SISTANI, J
SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL, J
FEBRUARY 02, 2016/sc
Barkha
State (GNCT of Delhi) & Ors
G.S.Sistani
Sangita Dhingra Sehgal
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
