SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2008 Supreme(SC) 1985

B.N.AGRAWAL, G.S.SINGHVI
Lalita Kumari – Appellant
Versus
Govt. of U. P. – Respondent


Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioners: S.B. Upadhyay, B.K. Shahi, B.P. Gupta, Pranesh, Mona Rajvanshi.
For the Respondents: Sharmila Upadhyay.
For the Intervenors : S.P. Juneja, Debasis Misra.
For the Mizoram : K.N. Madhusoodhanan, M.K. Michael.
For the Gujarat : Hemantika Wahi, Pinky, K. Enatoli Sema, Somnath.
For the Maharashtra : Ravindra K. Adsure.
For the NCT of Delhi : S.W.A. Qadri, Sadhana Sandhu, D.S. Mahra.
For the Punjab : Ajay Pal.
For the Manipur : Kh. Nobin Singh, David Rao, S. Biswajit Meitei, Vijay Prakash.
For the Assam : Avijit Roy
For the Uttar Pradesh : Shobha Dikshit, T.N. Singh, Rajeev Dubey, Kamlendra Mishra.
For the Karnataka : Anitha Shenoy.
For the Tamil Nadu : V.G. Pragasam.
For the U.T. Pondicherry : S.J. Aristotle, Prabu Ramasubramanian.

ORDER :

1. By order dated 14th July, 2008, we issued notices to the Chief Secretaries of all the States and Union Territories and Director Generals of Police/Commissioners of Police, as the case may be, to show cause as to why the directions enumerated therein be not given by this Court. Notices were sent to the aforesaid authorities by the Supreme Court Registry by fax and it was mentioned in the notices that the order has been put on the website of the Supreme Court of India so that they may file responses without loss of time. The order was put on the website of the Supreme Court of India, as directed by this Court.

2. It appears that notices have been served upon the Chief Secretaries of all the States and Union Territories and all the Director Generals of Police/Commissioners of Police, as the case may be but, in spite of that, it is pathetic state of affairs that only two States, viz. States of Uttar Pradesh and Arunachal Pradesh, have responded and the other States did not bother to file their responses. Some of them have simply engaged their counsel, who are appearing in court, and, as usual, they have made prayer for time to file responses.

3. In spite of the order passed on

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top