Petition under Section 528 BNSS sought directions that Gurugram police not harass the petitioner while recording statements in an FIR. State reported a cancellation report had been prepared; petition rendered infructuous and disposed of with liberty to pursue fresh remedies.
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.
CRM-M-37390-2024
331 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
CRM-M No.373290 of 2024 (O&M)
Date of Decision: 09.08.2024
Kavita Raiya ... Petitioner Versus State of Haryana and Others … Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP CHITKARA
Present: Mr. Manjit S. Gahlawat, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Viney Phogat, DAG, Haryana.
ANOOP CHITKARA, J .
(ANOOP CHITKARA) JUDGE
09.08.2024 Sonia Puri Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether reportable: Yes/No.
Sonia Puri 2024.08.13 11:47 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
1 issue framed by the court
Could the court direct police not to harass the petitioner while recording statements in an FIR lodged by private respondents?
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Kavita Raiya
State of Haryana
Anoop Chitkara
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
