The High Court of Delhi dismissed the writ petition as withdrawn without allocating a bench or hearing duration. Liberty was granted to file another petition in due course. No substantive legal issue was addressed.
Liberty to file another petition in due course; no substantive orders passed.
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.
$~16
ANIL KOTHARI JAIN
..... Petitioner
Through: Ms. Neha Kapoor, Advocate.
versus
STATE OF NCT OF DELHI
..... Respondent
Through: Mr. Jamal Akhtar, Advocate with SI Sanjeev Kumar, PS-Tilak Marg.
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI O R D E R % 03.07.2018
After some arguments the learned counsel for the petitioner seeks to withdraw the petition with liberty to file another petition in due course. She submits that her representation to the Government of Delhi may be directed to be decided expeditiously. The learned counsel for the respondent states that it will be looked into.
The petition is dismissed as withdrawn. Liberty granted.
NAJMI WAZIRI, J
JULY 03, 2018 /acm
ANIL KOTHARI JAIN
STATE OF NCT OF DELHI
NAJMI WAZIRI
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
