A writ petition challenging detention became infructuous as the detention order had lapsed. The high court dismissed the petition without any 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.
Sr. No. 07 Suppl. 2
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR AT SRINAGAR
(Through Virtual Mode)
WP(Cr1) No. 366/2019
Mohammad Maqbool Dar …. Petitioner/Applicant(s)
Through:Mr. Wajid Haseeb, Advocate with Ms. Afroza Hassan, Assisting counel
V/s
State of J&K and another
…..Respondent(s)
Through:Mr. Sajad Ashraf, GA
Coram : HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE SINDHU SHARMA, JUDGE ORDER
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is no extension of
detention order of the detenue, therefore, nothing survives for consideration in
this petition. His statement is taken on record.
In view of the aforesaid submission, this petition has become infructuous
and is accordingly dismissed.
| (Sindhu Sharma) Judge |
||
|---|---|---|
| SRINAGAR | ||
| 06.07.2020 | ||
| SUNIL-II | ||
| Whether the order is speaking | : Yes/No |
|
| Whether the order is reportable | : Yes/No |
Mohammad Maqbool Dar
State of J&K
Sindhu Sharma
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
