The Delhi High Court issued notice to Respondents 4 to 6 and the concerned SHO in W.P.(Crl.) 1169/2018 and listed the matter for further proceedings on 10th August 2018. No substantive adjudication is available in this order.
Notice issued to non-applicants/respondents 4 to 6 and the SHO; matter listed.
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.
$~10
PRATIBHA SHARMA ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. Avadh Kaushik, Advocate
versus
STATE (NCT OF DELHI) & ORS. ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Rahul Mehra, Standing Counsel (Crl.) with Mr. Chaitanya Gosain, Advocates for State
CORAM:
JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR JUSTICE VINOD GOEL
O R D E R % 24.07.2018
Crl.M.A.28415/2018
S. MURALIDHAR, J.
VINOD GOEL, J.
JULY 24, 2018 mw
Pratibha Sharma
State (NCT of Delhi) & Ors.
S. Muralidhar
Vinod Goel
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
