Veena Saxena v. The Union Of India Through Secretary Ministry Of Health And Family Welfare, New Delhi And ORS
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Writ Jurisdiction Case No.357 of 2016 ======================================================
1. Veena Saxena Wife of Ankur Johri Resident of Flat No. 111, Type-3, AIMS Residential Complex, P.S.-Khagaul, Dist.-Patna .... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The Union of India Through Secretary Ministry of Health And Family Welfare, New Delhi
2. The Director, All Indian Institute of Medical Science, Patna
3. The State of Bihar through the Director General of Police, Bihar, Patna
4. The Senior Superintendent of Police, Patna
5. The Superintendent of Police (WEST), Patna
6. The Station House Officer, Phulwarisharif Police Station, Patna
7. Sri Anil Kishore Yadav (Indian Police Service), Son of not known to the petitioner, presently posted as Deputy Director (Administration), All Indian Institute of Medical Science, Patna .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Manoj Kumar, Adv. For the Respondent/s : Mr. Uma Shankar, GP-4 For Union of India : Mr. S.D. Sanjay, A.S.G. Mr. Anshay Bahadur Mathur, CGC For Respondent No.7 Mr. P.N. Shahi, Sr. Adv. Mr. Mritunjay Kumar, Adv.
Mr. Patanjali Rishi, Adv.
For AIIMS Mr. Binay Kumar Pandey, Adv. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE ORAL ORDER 02-05-2016 Heard Mr. Manoj Kumar, learned Counsel, appearing on behalf of the petitioner, and Mr. Uma Shankar, learned Government Pleader No.4, for the State-respondents. Heard also Mr. S.D. Sanjay, learned Additional Solicitor General, appearing on behalf of the Union of India, Mr. P.N. Shahi, learned Senior Counsel, appearing on behalf of respondent No.7 and Mr. Binay Kumar Pandey, learned
Patna High Court Cr. WJC No.357 of 2016 (3) dt.02-05-2016 2/2 Counsel, appearing on behalf of All India Institute of Medical Sciences.
After some argument, learned Counsel for the petitioner seeks permission to withdraw this application with liberty to approach this Court with appropriate application, in future, if so advised, and also to take recourse to such provisions of law as may be permissible.
No objection has been raised to the prayer for withdrawal made on behalf of the petitioner.
In view of the above and in the interest of justice, the application is hereby disposed of as withdrawn with liberty granted to the petitioner to approach this Court with appropriate application, in future, if so advised, and also to take recourse to such provisions of law as may be permissible. (I.A. Ansari, ACJ) K.C.jha/- U T