Niyam v2 is live — start for just ₹100 — 200 credits to try

december 2025

Delhi High Court · 2025-12-17

LAXMI vs STATE NCT OF DELHI AND ANR

Citation / case number
W.P.(CRL)-2704/2025 2025:DHC:11507-DB
Court
Delhi High Court
Petitioner
LAXMI
Respondent
STATE NCT OF DELHI AND ANR

Judgment text excerpt

$~55 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of decision: 17.12.2025 + W.P.(CRL) 2704/2025 & CRL.M.A. 37851/2025 LAXMI .....Petitioner Through: None. versus STATE NCT OF DELHI AND ANR .....Respondents Through: Mr. Sanjay Lao, St. Counsel (Crl.) alongwith Ms. Priyam Agarwal, Mr. Abhinav Kr Arya and Mr. Aryan Sachdeva with SI Sahil, PS Dabri. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIVEK CHAUDHARY HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ JAIN JUDGMENT % W.P.(CRL) 2704/2025 1. The present writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (“BNSS”),seeking issuance of writ in the nature of Habeas Corpus, directing the respondents to recover the minor daughter of the petitioner and produce her before this Court. 2. The next date fixed in the present matter was 22.12.2025, but the matter has been taken up today on the request of learned Standing Counsel for the State as the girl in question has been recovered and is present in Court today. 3. Learned Standing Counsel for the State informs that the girl was Signature Not Verified W.P.(CRL) 2704/2025 Page 1 of 2 Signed By:PRATIBHA KUMARI Signing Date:18.12.2025 04:22:40 residing with her father and her father is also present in Court today. It is informed that the statement of the girl under Section 164 Cr.PC / Section 183 BNSS, is to be recorded today and, thereafter, she would be produced before Child Welfare Committee (“CWC”) for further necessary directions. 4. We have made inquiries from the girl in our chamber who is willing to go with her father and has serious reservation in going with her mother. 5. The Court Master was asked to contact learned counsel for the petitioner but we have been informed that the concerned counsel did not answer the ca

LAXMI vs STATE NCT OF DELHI AND ANR · Niyam