The petitioner, non-accused in a CBI case, withdrew a writ petition. The High Court dismissed the petition with liberty to apply again regarding trial court travel conditions.
Petition dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to apply.
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.
$~62
NISHA GUPTA .....Petitioner
versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Amit Tewari, CGSC with Mr. Hussain, Advocate for UOI/R-1,2 & 3 Mr. Santosh Kumar Rout, Ms. Dharna Veragi, Advocates for R-4/PNB Mr. Rajesh Kumar, SPP with Ms. Mishika Pandita, Advocate for CBI/R-5
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA
O R D E R % 05.07.2024 CM APPL. 37006/2024 (Seeking exemption)
W.P.(C) 9046/2024 & CM APPL. 37005/2024 (Seeking stay)
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 04/07/2025 at 00:49:17
cognizance by the Trial Court. Mr. Sabharwal argues that the Petitioner is not an accused. On this point, Ms. Mishika Pandita, counsel for CBI, states that stage for taking cognizance has not reached as yet.
SANJEEV NARULA, J
JULY 5, 2024/ab
This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 04/07/2025 at 00:49:17
NISHA GUPTA
UNION OF INDIA
SANJEEV NARULA
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
