Petitioners sought to withdraw their writ petitions; counsel stated withdrawal on instructions without prejudice to rights and contentions. The High Court dismissed the petitions as withdrawn with liberty as stated. No substantive adjudication.
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
.....Petitioners
Through: Mr. Nishaank Mattoo, Advocate. versus
STATE OF NCT DELHI AND ORS .....Respondents Through: Mr. Gautam Khazanchi, Mr, Vaibhav Dubey and Ms. Aditi Kukreja, Advocates for Intervenors. Ms. Rupali Bandhopadhya, ASC (Crl.) with Mr. Abhijeet Kumar and Mr. Anurag Arora, Advocates for State. Mr. Nikhil, SI, EOW, Delhi.
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA
O R D E R % 15.01.2025
SANJEEV NARULA, J
JANUARY 15, 2025 nk
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 24/01/2025 at 14:58:53
G L Khera & Ors.
State of NCT Delhi
Ors.
Sanjeev Narula
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
