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
7 paragraphs · 192 wordsAlexander Thomas, J.
The prayers in the afore captioned W.P.(Crl.), seeking for writs of habeas corpus and certiorari, are as follows:
“i) To issue a writ in the nature of HABEAS CORPUS or any other appropriate writ, order or direction compelling and commanding the respondents to produce the detenu before this Honorable Court and quash the Ext.P1 detention order which was approved and confirmed, order confirming the detention order, the order disposing the detention order are liable to be quashed and to set the detenu at liberty.
ii) Petitioner also prays that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to dispense with the translation of the documents produced in the vernacular language.
iii) To grant such other reliefs prayed for by the petitioner in the interest of justice.”
Today when the matter has been taken up for consideration, Sri.C. Rajendran, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, would submit on the basis of the instructions of the petitioner that the above writ petition (criminal) may be closed as infructuous, in view of the subsequent developments.
Recording the abovesaid submission of the petitioner, the aforecaptioned writ petition (criminal) will stand dismissed as infructuous.