The single judge court disposed of the writ petition as infructuous due to lack of current threat perception, granting liberty to file an application if a new cause of action arises.
Liberty to file appropriate application if any further cause of action arises.
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.
| SL. No. |
Date | Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures |
COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS |
|---|---|---|---|
| WPCRL No. 1639 of 2020 Shri Sanjaya Kumar Mishra, ACJ. Shri Ramesh Chandra Khulbe, J. Mr. Amit Kapri, learned counsel for the petitioners. Mr. J.S. Virk, learned Deputy Advocate General with Mr. Rakesh Joshi, learned Brief Holder for the State of Uttarakhand. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that at present there is no threat perception to the petitioners’ life from the private respondents. Hence, writ petition is disposed of as infructuous. However, liberty is given to the petitioners to file appropriate application, if any further cause of action arises. |
|||
(R.C. Khulbe, J.) (S.K. Mishra, ACJ.) 04.03.2022 A/- |
the petitioners
the State of Uttarakhand
Sanjaya Kumar Mishra, ACJ
Ramesh Chandra Khulbe
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
