The Court disposed of a writ petition after the State confirmed that protection would be provided if required, obviating the immediate need for a specific order.
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.
WPCRL No. 1432 of 2014 Hon’ble V.K.Bist, J. Hon’ble U.C. Dhyani, J.
Mr. Abhishek Verma, Advocate, present for the writ petitioners.
Mr. A. S. Gill, learned Deputy Advocate General, present for the State.
Learned counsel for the petitioners states that as per direction of this Hon’ble Court necessary protection is being provided to the petitioners and at present there is no need for protection.
Learned Deputy Advocate General submitted that in case the need arises and the petitioners approach to S.H.O. of the concerned Police Station, the required protection shall be provided to them.
In view of the statement of learned Deputy Advocate General, the writ petition is disposed of.
(U.C. Dhyani, J.) (V.K.Bist, J.) 08.04.2015
Kaushal
Petitioners
State
V.K. Bist
U.C. Dhyani
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
