Petitioner sought ninety days parole. State counsel noted application pending. Court observed no order needed at this stage, permitting future approach if grievances arise, and dismissed the petition.
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.
NAUSHAD .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Siddharth Yadav, Adv. versus STATE (NCT OF DELHI) .....Respondent Through: Mr. Rahul Tyagi, ASC for the State with Mr. Sangeet Sibou, Mr. Jatin, Mr. Mathew M. Philip, Ms. Priya Rai & Mr. Abhishek Tomar, Advs. SI Anugraha, PSWelcome
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT MAHAJAN
O R D E R % 24.09.2024
AMIT MAHAJAN, J
SEPTEMBER 24, 2024 “SS”
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 04:22:11
Naushad
State (NCT of Delhi)
Amit Mahajan
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
