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

2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 8910

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
C. JAYACHANDRAN, J
S.AMEERJAN – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent


Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SRI.V.V.NANDAGOPAL NAMBIAR, SMT.PREEJA. P.VIJAYAN, SMT.SMITHA (EZHUPUNNA), KUM.PAVAN ROSE JOHNSON, SMT.VANDANA BHAT T.V., SHRI. SAYED MANSOOR BAFAKHY THANGAL, SHRI.SARATH VISWANATHAN, SMT.HAIRA
For the Respondents: SMT.DEEPA NARAYANAN- SR.GP., SRI.ANEESH JAMES, SRI.V.PHILIP MATHEWS, SHRI.P.C.SASIDHARAN, SHRI.AKSHAY VENU, SMT.JAEONA JAMES

JUDGMENT

The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that in view of the rejection of the representation, the petitioner seeks to file a fresh Writ Petition, for which reason, the instant Writ Petition may be dismissed, as not pressed.

2. Liberty sought for is granted and the instant Writ Petition will stand dismissed as not pressed. All contentions will stand left open.

Sd/-

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