In a habeas corpus petition filed by a petitioner for his missing niece who allegedly married without consent, the Court, noting the girl's appearance in court confirming the marriage was voluntary and consensual, saw no reason to issue further directions and disposed of the petition.
The petition was disposed of; no further direction was issued.
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.
$~7
STATE (NCT) OF DELHI & ORS ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Chaintaya Gosain, Advocate for Mr. Rahul Mehra, Standing Counsel (Crl.) for State with Insp. Rajeev Ranjan and SI Naveen Kumar, PS- Seelampur.
CORAM: JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR JUSTICE I.S.MEHTA
O R D E R % 16.05.2018
CRL.M.A. 9346/2018
W.P.(CRL) 1526/2018
S.MURALIDHAR, J.
I.S.MEHTA, J.
MAY 16, 2018 nd
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the court should issue further directions in a habeas corpus petition once the missing girl and her husband appear and confirm the marriage was consensual.
Whether the apprehension of the petitioner regarding the safety of his niece justifies continuing the writ proceedings when the girl affirms her free will.
KUNAL SAI
STATE (NCT) OF DELHI
S.MURALIDHAR
I.S.MEHTA
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
