Petitioner's writ petition was dismissed for non-prosecution as the learned standing counsel for the State indicated the one year externment period had expired.
Petition dismissed for non-prosecution.
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.
$~49
GOVIND ..... Petitioner
Represented by: None
versus
THE STATE (GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI) ..... Respondent Represented by: Ms. Kamna Vohra, ASC Insp. Pawan Sharma, P.S. Nihal Vihar
CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA
O R D E R % 05.04.2018
None for the petitioner.
Status report is handed over which is taken on record. Learned Additional Standing Counsel for the State submits that the one year period of externment is over today. This appears to be a reason for non appearance on behalf of the petitioner.
The petition is dismissed for non prosecution.
MUKTA GUPTA, J.
APRIL 05, 2018 ns
GOVIND
THE STATE (GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI)
MUKTA GUPTA
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
