Writ petition seeking quashing was withdrawn by the petitioners with liberty to file afresh, intending to file a common quashing petition covering another FIR. Petition disposed of 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.
$~23
.....Petitioner
Through: Ms. Pallavi, Advocate.
versus
THE STATE & ORS.
.....Respondent Through: Mr. Sanjeev Bhandari, Ld. ASC for the State with M.r Arjit Sharma and Mr. Nikunj Bindal, Advocates with SI Parminder Kumar P.S. Aman Vihar.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA
O R D E R % 03.03.2025 1. Learned counsel for the Petitioner seeks permission to withdraw the present Petition with liberty to file afresh and submits that there is one another FIR and the Petitioner intends to file a common quashing Petition.
NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA, J
MARCH 3, 2025/va
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 05/03/2025 at 15:01:06
Shekh Karim & Ors
The State & Ors
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
