AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
6 paragraphs · 110 wordsW. Diengdoh, J
Heard Mr. S.K. Hassan, learned counsel for the petitioner.
The respondent No. 1/State of Meghalaya is represented by Mr. H. Kharmih, learned Addl. P.P as such, no formal notice is required to be issued upon such respondent.
The learned counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that he may be allowed to take steps for issuance of notice upon the respondent No. 2/complainant.
Accordingly, let notice be issued upon the respondent No. 2. The learned Addl. P.P is to ensure that the IO would file the compliance and status report as far as the service of notice upon the respondent No. 2.
List this matter on 03.07.2025.