Ritika Mundra & Ors v. State of N.C.T. of Delhi & Anr

ORDER

21.10.20L1 Respondent No 4 and his'wife, that is, the parents of Petitioner No. 1 are present in the court and they state that the Petitioner No. 1 is major. They further state that he had lodged a missing report however, since now they have come to know that their daughter i.e. Petitioner No. t has married Petitioner No.2 of her own free will, they will not pursue the said missing report and they have no complaint whatsoever against the Petitioners. They also state that they will not interfere in the happy married life of the Petitioners. In view of the statement of the Respondent No. 4 and his wife, the petitioners who are present in Court, do not wish to press the present petition. Petition is dismissed as not pressed. Order dasti' fl"^*rtuM-

NMUKTA GUPTA, J. ocToBER 2L, 20ll tvnt DELHI AT NEW DELIII ..... Petitioner Mr. Manoj Kumar Sharma, Advocate oh \J Certify that the digital and physical file have been compared and the digital data is as per the physical file and no page is missing.

40# $- * IN TI{E HIGH COURT OF + w.P.(cRL) 894120rr RITIKA MUNDRA & ORS Through: versus STATE OF N.C.T. OF DELHI & ANR ""' Respondent Through: \4r. Amit Singh Rathore, Advocate for Vk. Saleem Ahmed, Additional Standing Counsel with SI Vrjay Kumar, PS GaziPur, Delhi. Nk. Rajesh Pathak and Mr' SanjaY Kathuria, Advocates for Respondent No 4 with RespondentNo' 4 in person' CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JT]STICE MUKTA GUPTA