A criminal miscellaneous application was allowed subject to exceptions upon withdrawal of the connected writ petition, which was dismissed as withdrawn. No substantive legal principles were laid down.
Leave to withdraw petition granted; Crl.M.A. allowed subject to conditions; writ petition dismissed as withdrawn.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.
$~40
LOMAS RISHI GUPTA & ORS. ..... Petitioner
Represented by: Mr. Ashok Drall, Advocate.
versus
MS. TANUPRIYA GUPTA & ANR. ..... Respondent Represented by: None. CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA
O R D E R
% 05.12.2018
Crl.M.A. No. 29265/2018 (Exemption)
Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
W.P.(CRL) 2312/2018
Learned counsel for the petitioners seeks leave to withdraw the petition.
Leave granted.
Petition is dismissed as withdrawn.
MUKTA GUPTA, J.
DECEMBER 05, 2018
‘yo’
LOMAS RISHI GUPTA & ORS.
MS. TANUPRIYA GUPTA & ANR.
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
