Ramprakash v. TT o Axtd

Delhi High Court · 08 Nov 2016 · 2016:DHC:8676
Valmiki J. Mehta
W.P.(C) 976/2016
2016:DHC:8676
constitutional petition_dismissed

AI Summary

The High Court declined to entertain writ petitions connected to a pending criminal case and granted liberty to the petitioner to file appropriate petitions after the criminal proceedings conclude.

Full Text
Translation output
r-'irS. Hic» COOTI OF OILBI AT NFW KT""
. W,P.,C, - « APPF NJ- liU (»'I"""""«'• °® " ramPRAKASH ^ Advocate.
VERSUS
TT^ o AXTD ..Respondents
PUNJABnation^ ^ Advocate forR-2. r T? 7
Mr. Jagat Arora, Advocate for R-i-
+
+ wP(C) 976/2016 and C.M. Appl. No. 4294«016 (for stay, U/S mCPC'^Article226oftheConstitutionofIndia)
Petitioner
. JTCtitlwiAwx ram PRAKASH vishwendra Verma and
Through, Advocates.
VERSUS
Respondents union ofINDIA Arora, Advocate for R-U
Mr. Rajesh Kumar Gautam, Advocate for R-2.
W.P.(C)7814/2016and C.M.Appl.No. 32296/2016(U/S151 r/w Article226 ofthe Constitution ofIndia)
Petitioner
RAMPRAKASH^ Mr. Vishwendra Verma and
Mr.Ganesh Kumar, Advocates.
VERSUS
W.P.fC) 10549/2016
2016:DHC:8676
Mr. Rajesh Kumar Gautam, Advocate for R-2.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKIJ. MEHTA
% 08.11.2016
ORDER

1. Counsel for the petitioner states that since a criminal case pertaining to FIR no. 349/2013 is pending, as such, for the present, these writ petitions are not pressed, but liberty be granted to the petitioner to file writ petitions for seeking appropriate relief after closure of the criminal case proceedings pertaining to FIR NO. 349/2013.

2. Petitionsare accordingly not pressedwith the aforesaid liberty.

VALMIKI J. MEHTA, J NOVEMBER 08,2016 M,