Petitioner filed a contempt petition alleging non-compliance with a prior direction regarding a pending representation before the Election Commission. The Commission counsel disclosed an hearing date, leading the petitioner to withdraw the petition.
Contempt petition disposed of as not pressed by the petitioner.
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.
$~108
VA PUGAZHENDI .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Kartik Venu, Advocate.
versus
THE ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Ankit Agarwal, Standing Counsel for respondent No.1 with Ms. Viyushti Rawat, Advocate. Mr. Balaji Srinivasan, Advocate.
CORAM:
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ JAIN
O R D E R % 17.12.2024
CONT.CAS(C) 1983/2024
1
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 19/12/2024 at 12:54:52
said representation was to be considered.
MANOJ JAIN, J
DECEMBER 17, 2024 st
CONT.CAS(C) 1983/2024
2
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 19/12/2024 at 12:54:52
V Pugazhendi
The Election Commission of India
Manoj Jain
As recorded by the court registry
Proceedings for wilful disobedience of a court order under the Contempt of Courts Act 1971.
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
