Petitioner applied to withdraw writ petitions as the underlying FIR was quashed by a Coordinate Bench. Court disposed of petitions as withdrawn and also disposed of pending applications.
Petitions disposed of as withdrawn along with pending applications.
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.
$~63 & 64
versus
STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS. .....Respondents
Through: Mr. Amol Sinha, ASC for the State. + W.P.(CRL) 351/2024 and CRL.M.A. 3266/2024 THAKUR DASS GABA & ANR. .....Petitioners Through: Mr. Dhanesh Relan, Advocate via video-conferencing with Mr. Jatin Bhatia, Advocate.
versus
STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Amol Sinha, ASC for the State. Mr. R.K. Mohit Gupta, Advocates for R-2 & R-3.
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANUP JAIRAM BHAMBHANI O R D E R % 21.08.2024
Mr. Dhanesh Relan, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners in these matters seeks leave to withdraw the present petitions, since the FIR that forms the subject matter of the proceedings has been quashed by a Coordinate Bench of this court vide order(s) dated 21.08.2024 in W.P. (CRL) No. 2545/2024 & W.P. (CRL) No. 3665/2023.
The petitions are accordingly disposed-of as withdrawn.
Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed-of.
ANUP JAIRAM BHAMBHANI, J
AUGUST 21, 2024/ V.Rawat
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 27/08/2024 at 11:52:57
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
W.P. (CRL) No. 2545/2024 & W.P. (CRL) No. 3665/2023Referred¶10
RANJAN SARDANA AND THAKUR DASS GABA
STATE OF NCT OF DELHI
ANUP JAIRAM BHAMBHANI
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
