Petitioners sought withdrawal of CRL.M.C. 215/2016. Learned counsel was permitted to withdraw the petition, which was dismissed accordingly.
Petition dismissed as withdrawn.
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.
$~19
DILIP PAREKH & ANR ..... Petitioners Through: Mr. Ram Avtar, Advocate
versus
THE STATE & ORS ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Mukesh Kumar, APP for State with SI Kailash Kumar, P.S. Mangol Puri.
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA O R D E R
% 16.07.2018
After some hearing, learned counsel for the petitioners submits, on instructions, that he may be permitted to withdraw the petition.
The petition stands dismissed as withdrawn.
R.K.GAUBA, J
JULY 16, 2018 srb
Dilip Parekh
The State
R.K. Gauba
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
