Petitioner, a Dr., sought withdrawal of this writ petition due to lack of territorial jurisdiction over IIT Guwahati matters, which the court allowed.
Leave to withdraw the writ petition with liberty to avail appropriate remedy before a court of competent jurisdiction.
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.
$~1
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
DR. BRIJESH KUMAR RAI ..... Petitioner Through : Mr. Shishir Pinaki and Mr. Rajiv Kumar Sinha, Advs. along with petitioner. versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS. ..... Respondents Through : Mr. Jasmeet Singh, CGSC for UOI. Mr. Vivek Sood, Sr. Adv. with Mr. R.P. Kakoti, Mr. Arijit Prasad, Mr. Ramjee Pandey and Ms. Prachi Gupta, Advs. for R-5 and 6. Mr. Ripu Daman Bhardwaj, SPP for R-7/CBI.
CORAM: HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.HARI SHANKAR
O R D E R % 18.05.2018
page 1 of 2
W.P.(CRL) 1227/2018
ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE
C.HARI SHANKAR, J
MAY 18, 2018/ aj
page 2 of 2
W.P.(CRL) 1227/2018
DR. BRIJESH KUMAR RAI
UNION OF INDIA & ORS.
HARI SHANKAR
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
