Petitioners sought police protection alleging stalking and a live-in relationship involving Respondent No. 2 against them. The court noted the complaint to local police and the state's assurance of appropriate action before disposing of the matter.
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.
$~16
X & ANR
..... Petitioners Through: Mr Jayant Bhatt, Mr Hamid Khan and Ms Mekkala Pandey, Advs
versus
DEPUTY COMMISSIONERR OF POLICE & ANR
..... Respondents Through: Mr Piyush Singhal, Adv for Mr Ashish Aggarwal, ASC for State
CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE INDERMEET KAUR
Petitioners are seeking police protection. Parties had been married in December 2017. Respondent No. 2 is stated to be stalking both the petitioners a respondent No. 2 was also having a live-in relationship with petitioner No. 2. Petitioners submit that a complaint has been made to the local police station on 28.02.2018.
Learned counsel for the state on advance notice points out that on receipt of the aforenoted complaint, the petitioners had been asked to appear and join investigation, however, they did not have time but the police authorities will take appropriate action on the complaint of the petitioners and if required, the petitioners will have to join the investigation.
Petition disposed of in the above terms. No further orders are
called for.
INDERMEET KAUR, J
MARCH 14, 2018 SU
X & ANR
DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF POLICE & ANR
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
