Khalil Ahmad v. The State (NCT Of Delhi) & ANR.
$~8 *
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P. (CRL) 1012/2020 KHALIL AHMAD ..... Petitioner Through Mr Mohammad Hasibuddin, Mr Sourav Ghosh, Advocates with petitioner in person.
versus THE STATE (NCT OF DELHI) & ANR.
..... Respondents Through Ms Poonam Malik, Advocate for Mr Avi Singh, ASC for State.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU
O R D E R
% 06.07.2020 [Hearing held through videoconferencing] 1.
The petitioner has fled the present petition, inter alia, praying as under:- "Direct the respondents to provide protection to the petitioner and his parents by not harassing and illegally detaining them in the police station under the garb of inquiry in the interest of justice"
2.
The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner states that the petitioner and his parents have been repeatedly called to the police station as the petitioner's brother who was living on the first floor of the property where petitioner resides, had run away with a woman after abandoning his wife. He states that the petitioner has nothing to do with any of the actions of his brother (Mohd Vakeel) and is being unfairly harassed. He states that the CCTV Footage of the Police Station would indicate that he as well as his
parents had been made to sit in the police station for a whole day on more than one occasion.
3.
Mr Avi Singh, learned ASC appearing for the State states that investigations were being conducted on the basis of the complaint filed by the petitioner's sister-in-law (wife of Mohd Vakeel). She has alleged that Mohd Vakeel had attempted to divorce her by pronouncing triple Talaq, which is illegal. Mr Singh states that the petitioner was called to the police station only as a witness and not accused, to make inquiries. He further states that in the event any further inquiries are to be made from the petitioner or his parents in future, they would be summoned by a proper notice clearly indicating the time at which they are required to be present at the police station. They would not be detained unnecessarily and the inquiry, if any, would be conducted at the specifically stated time and in accordance with law.
4.
In view of the above, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner seeks to withdraw the present petition while reserving all rights of the petitioner.
5.
The petition is dismissed as withdrawn. All rights of the petitioner are reserved.
VIBHU BAKHRU, J JULY 06, 2020 pkv