Dismissed

Ajay Gautam v. Union of India & Ors.

Delhi HC9 Mar 2018W.P.(CRL)/318/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner, appearing in person, sought guidelines for Section 156(3) CrPC proceedings due to grievances about protracted police action. The Court found the petition defective for lacking factual articulation. Leave to withdraw was granted, and the petition was dismissed accordingly.

What did the court decide?

Leave to withdraw the writ petition granted; petition dismissed as withdrawn.

Ajay Gautam Vs Union of India & Ors. — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Delhi HC (2018)

¶1

$~33

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(CRL) 318/2018 & Crl.M.A.No. 1923/2018 AJAY GAUTAM ..... Petitioner Through : Petitioner in person versus

¶3

UNION OF INDIA & ORS ..... Respondents Through : Mr. Vikram Jetly, CGSC for R-1 & 2 Ms. Sonia Sharma, SC for R-3 Mr. Rahul Mehra, SC(Crl.) with Mr. Jamal Akhtar, Mr. Tushar Sannu and Mr. Anuj Jain, Advs. for the State Insp. Narender Singh & SI Rajesh Kumar from PS Dabri

¶4

CORAM: HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.HARI SHANKAR

¶5

O R D E R % 09.03.2018

¶6

The petitioner who appears in person has made detailed submissions which relate to the facts of a complaint filed against him and his wife by a third party; the orders arising therefrom; the protracted enquiry being undertaken by the police and the action taken reports being filed. The primary grievance of the petitioner appears to be that the protracted proceedings which have no basis in law or in facts are being maintained against him and his wife in utter disregard of their rights under Article 21 of the Constitution

¶7

page 1 of 2

¶8

of India. The petitioner submits that the trial courts as well as the respondents are proceeding in a like manner in most applications which are filed under Section 156(3) of the CrPC. A prayer is therefore made for framing of guidelines with regard to the manner in which the proceedings under Section 156(3) CrPC are to be undertaken by the courts and how the police is required to proceed pursuant to orders passed thereon. There appears to be substance in the grievance of the petitioner and the prayers sought by him.

¶9

Unfortunately, the writ petition does not articulate the above facts or the grievance in a proper manner and deserves to be reframed. The writ petitioner ought to place the entire factual background in the petition itself instead of enclosing the complaint and the proceedings and action taken reports as mere annexures thereto.

¶10

In view of the above, the petitioner seeks leave to withdraw this writ petition with liberty to file appropriate proceedings in accordance with law.

¶11

This writ petition and application are dismissed as withdrawn with liberty as prayed.

¶12

Dasti under signatures of the Court Master.

¶13

ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE

¶14

C.HARI SHANKAR, J

¶15

MARCH 09, 2018/ kr

¶16

page 2 of 2

Ajay Gautam v. Union of India & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ajay Gautam v. Union of India & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sajid @ Shambhu Vs State

Mohit Gupta & Ors. Vs the State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi) & Anr.

Alam @ Mamoon Vs State

Darpan Vs the State Govt of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Sudhir Sharma Vs the State Govt of NCT of Delhi

Ruksana Vs National Capital Territory of Delhi & Anr.

Meenu Anita Chohan Vs State & Ors.

Shri Rajiv Sharma Vs the Registar Co-Operative Societies Delhi

Lalit Kumar Vs Department for the Welfare of Sc/St/Obc/Minorities & Ors.

Bonded Labour Watch Vs Union of India & Ors.

Sanjucta Kabasi Vs Ravi S Prasad & Ors.

Mr. Sunil Singh Vs Union of India and Anr.

Sushen Mohan Gupta and Ors. Vs Union of India and Ors.

Vijay Singh and Anr. Vs Union of India and Anr.