W.P.(CRL)/163/2025 of KAMINI HURIYA Vs THE STATE & ORS.
Parties
- > picture [34 x 34] intentionally omitted <== (PETITIONER)
- THE STATE & ORS (RESPONDENT)
Cites (1)
Full text
solid underline = linked page · dashed underline = case is in our corpus, page not published yet · dotted red = recognized reference, not in our corpus
*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI+W.P.(CRL) 163/2025KAMINI HURIYA.....Petitioner
.....Petitioner
Through:Ms Sunita Sharma, Adv.
versus
THE STATE & ORS......RespondentsThrough:Mr Rahul Tyagi, ASC for State with Ms Priya Rai,Mr Sangeet Sibou, Mr Amit Rohila and Mr AniketKumar Singh, Advs.SI Hemant, PS-Paschim Vihar West
CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASMEET SINGHO R R17.01.2025
1.This is petition seeking directions against respondent Nos. 1 to 3 toprovide police protection for getting the kiosk back at the site allotted by therespondent No.4 i.e. MCD and to protect her life, liberty and property.
2.As far as getting the kiosk back at the site is concerned, the same is acivil remedy for which the petitioner will have to invoke appropriateproceedings in Civil Courts.
3.As regards to the protection of her life, liberty and property isconcerned, it is stated by Ms Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner thatrespondent No. 5 is threatening the petitioner with dire consequences andcoercing the petitioner to not to place the kiosk back.
4.Mr Aniket, learned counsel appearing for and on behalf of Mr Rahul
Tyagi, learned ASC for respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 3 states that the phone
number of the Beat Officer as well as of the concerned SHO has alreadybeen shared with the petitioner and the protection of life and liberty of thepetitioner is the paramount duty of respondent Nos. 1, 2, 3 and they shallcontinue to do so. However, with regard to the civil remedies, the petitioneris free to avail the same in accordance with law.
5.The petition is disposed of in the aforesaid terms.
JANUARY 17, 2025
JASMEET SINGH, J
Click here to check corrigendum, if any