The petitioner sought relief regarding a summons. The respondent counsel stated that investigation had concluded and no notice is issued. The Court held the petition to be infructuous and disposed of it.
Nil. The petition was disposed of as infructuous.
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.
$~57
.....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Naveen Malhotra and Mr. Ritvik Malhotra, Advocates
versus
DIRECTDIRECTORATE OF REVENUE INTELLIGENCE & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr.Aditya Singla, SSC with Mr. Raghav Bakshi, Advs. for DR
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANISH DAYAL
O R D E R
% 13.11.2024
ANISH DAYAL, J
NOVEMBER 13, 2024/sm
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 18/11/2024 at 12:28:17
Satish Jain
Directorate of Revenue Intelligence & Ors.
Anish Dayal
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
