- Court
- High Court of Delhi
- Decided
- 17 November 2011
- Bench
- Badar Durrez Ahmed, Veena Birbal
- Case no.
- W.P.(CRL) 1464/2011
Judgment
ORDER
17.tl.2Otl We have heard counsel for the parlies and have also heard Jyoti Yadav in clrambers. She is 21 years old and she has indicated to us that she wants to reside with her parents. The leamed counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned counsel for Jyoti has stated that their clients are agreeable for divorce by mutual consent and that steps would be taken in that regard. In view of the foregoing, a Jyoti Yadav is fi'ee to reside with her parents. No further directions are necessary in this writ petition. The same stands disposed of. lH/l-> VEENA'{# NOVtr],MI}ER 17,2O1I srb NEW DELHI D. t/"
Case details
Parties and counsel
L/ $-1 {< -t- IN TIIE IIIGH COUII.T OX' DELHI AT w.P.(cRL) r464t20r1 KRISIIAN GUPTA ..... Petitioner Through Mr R.K. Gupta, Advocate versus STATE & ORS ..... Respondent Through Mr Pawan Shanna, St. Counsel for State Mr R.L. Sharma. Adv. for Jvoti. CORAM: IION'BLE MR JUSTICB BADAR DURREZ AHMEI) IION'I}I,E MS JUSTICE VEENA BIRI}AL
Source: High Court of Delhi, through the eCourts High Court services, via the Indian High Court Judgments open dataset by Dattam Labs (CC BY 4.0). Text was extracted from the official PDF and may contain conversion errors. Check the official PDF before relying on it.