Petitioner sought writ relief restraining police harassment over alleged theft of documents and false complaints regarding his irregular appointments. Court observed theft complaint was pending elsewhere and specific station complaint was unmerited.
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.
$~20
JUGESH ASPAL ..... Petitioner
Through: Petitioner in person.
versus COMMISSIONER OF POLICE DELHI ..... Respondent Through: Mr Anuj Aggarwal, ASC, Mr Atul Goyal, Advocates for respondent alongwith Insp. Sanjeev Mandal.
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU O R D E R % 02.07.2019
b. To investigate the theft and use of personal and private documents for filing frivolous complaints under various police stations without jurisdictions and on the same matter in nexus with the persons against whom complaints were made by the petitioner against their irregular appointments.
c. To investigate by the senior police officer in the matter of fraudulent and manipulated appointments made in AIU on
pick and choose basis without required qualification and experience in AIU as per complaint made by the petitioner.”
this case. In the event any other complaint is filed against the petitioner, the same would also be considered in accordance with law.
VIBHU BAKHRU, J
JULY 02, 2019/MK
JUGESH ASPAL
COMMISSIONER OF POLICE DELHI
VIBHU BAKHRU
As recorded by the court registry
A petition under Article 226 of the Constitution asking a High Court to issue a writ against the State or a public authority in a civil matter.
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
