REGENT COMPUTRONICS PVT. LTD.

Jeeshan Appellant

V/S

STATE OF U. P. Respondents

Referred Judgements :-

BIR SINGH VS. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH [REFERRED TO]
MALAK SINGH VS. STATE OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA [REFERRED TO]
NARENDRA KUMAR MAHESHWARI VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
R RAJAGOPAL ALIAS R R GOPAL VS. STATE OF TAMIL NADU [REFERRED TO]
NATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION VS. STATE OF ARUNACHAL PRADESH [REFERRED TO]
BHAVESH JAYANTI LAKHANI VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [REFERRED TO]
SYNDICATE BANK VS. RAMACHANDRAN PILLAI [REFERRED TO]
MEHMOOD NAYYAR AZAM VS. STATE OF CHATTISGARH [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA VS. SAEED SOHAIL SHEIKH [REFERRED TO]
UMESH KUMAR VS. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH [REFERRED TO]
NAVTEJ SINGH JOHAR VS. UNION OF INDIA THR SECRETARY MINISTRY OF LAW AND JUSTICE [REFERRED TO]
JUSTICE K. S. PUTTASWAMY (RETD) VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
IN-RE BANNERS PLACED ON ROAD SIDE IN THE CITY OF LUCKNOW VS. STATE OF U.P. [REFERRED TO]

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Upendra Upadhyay, Siya Ram Verma and Sri Shiv Bahadur Singh, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri Vinod Diwaker, learned A.A.G. for the State assisted by Sri Deepak Mishra and Ms. Manju Thakur, learned A.G.A. and Sri Vinay Saran, learned Amicus assisted by Sri Saumitra Dwivedi.

(2.) These three petitions raise a common issue of violation of Right to Privacy on account of list of top-10 criminals displayed at different Police Stations namely, Khuldabad, District-Prayagraj, Police Station-Bithoor, District-Kanpur Nagar and at Police Station-Karchhana, District-Prayagraj.

(3.) Petitioner's contention is that he is into the business of a concrete and sand, his firm is registered, along with GST number. Petitioner claims to be an income tax payee.

Click here to view full judgment.

JEESHAN Vs. STATE OF U. P.

Referred Judgements :-

JUDGEMENT

QUick Links

Get in Touch

Email

Contact Numbers

Address