A short order disposing of a writ petition where the petitioner complained of inaction by police despite several complaints. The court assured the State of necessary action and disposed of the petition without detailed examination.
The State assured to take necessary action in accordance with law. The petition was disposed of.
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.
$~18
..... Petitioner
Through Mr. M.L. Yadav, Adv. versus
STATE (NCT OF DELHI) & ORS
..... Respondents Through Mr. Amit Ahlawat for Ms. Kamna Vohra, ASC for the State along with SI Rakesh Malik.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE INDERMEET KAUR
O R D E R
% 05.03.2018
The petitioner is aggrieved by the fact that inspite of several complaints forwarded by him to the concerned Police Station, no action has been taken upon them. His last complaint is dated 06.10.2017.
Learned counsel for the State under instructions states that the complaint of the petitioner shall be answered in accordance with law and whatever necessary action has to be taken upon the complaint shall be taken.
Petition disposed of.
Order dasti.
INDERMEET KAUR, J
MARCH 05, 2018 A
Shri R.N. Kaushal
State (NCT of Delhi) & Ors
Indermeet Kaur
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
