Petitioners sought protection from harassing parents regarding custody of a minor sent to a shelter. Court held the petition survives nothing as the petitioner daughter remained in respondent custody by CWC orders.
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.
$~29
SANIYA AND ANR. .....Petitioners
Through: Counsel for petitioners. versus STATE AND ORS .....Respondents Through: Mr. Anand V. Khatri, ASC (Crl.) for the State with SI Tanu, P.S. Mangolpuri. Mr. Arshan Ahmad, Advocate for R2.
CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA
O R D E R % 16.08.2024
NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA, J
AUGUST 16, 2024/RS
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 20/08/2024 at 13:00:45
1 issue framed by the court
whether the petition for protection from parents requires adjudication when the minor daughter is already in respondent custody under CWC orders
Sania anr
State anr
Neena Bansal Krishna
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
