ITEM NO.20 COURT NO.14 SECTION II-C S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s). 11973/2022
(Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 02-11-2022 in BA No. 2278/2022 passed by the High Court Of Delhi At New Delhi)
NIKHAT FATIMA Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
THE STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR. Respondent(s)
IA No. 178529/2022 – EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT
IA No. 178528/2022 – EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T.)
Date : 24-01-2023 These matters were called on for hearing today.
CORAM :
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DIPANKAR DATTA
For Petitioner(s) Mr. Nirbhay Kumar, Adv.
Mr. Rahul Ranjan, Adv.
Mr. Abhay Kumar, Adv.
Mr. Gurudatt, Adv.
Mr. Prabhat Kumar, Adv.
Mr. Subham Srivastav, Adv.
Mr. K.S. Shajith Pasha, Adv.
Mr. Abhijit Yadav, Adv.
Mr. Md. Naushad Alam, AOR
For Respondent(s) Mr. Sanjay Jain, A.S.G.
Mr. Shreekant Neelappa Terdal, AOR
Mr. Arkaj Kumar, Adv.
Mr. Padmesh Mishra, Adv.
Ms. Ashima Gupta, Adv.
Ms. Tanya Aggarwal, Adv.
Ms. Harshita Sukhija, Adv.
Mr. Ashok Panigrahi, Adv.
Mr. Shuvodeep Roy, Adv.
Ms. Vanshaja Shukla, Adv.
Ms. Anu Gupta, AOR
Mr. Parvez Siddiqui, Adv.
Mr. Sanjay Mani Tripathi, Adv.
Mr. Sanjay Jain, ASG
1 Mr. Ashok P., Adv.
Ms. V. Shukla, Adv.
Mr. Shuvodeep Roy, Adv.
Mr. Arkaj Kumar, Adv.
Mr. G.S. Makker, AOR
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
O R D E R
After having heard counsel for the parties and also given the allegations in the counter affidavit and the circumstance that the second respondent has been denied bail in FIR 97/2022 in which he is accused of having committing offences punishable under Section 384 r/w Section 120B IPC, this Court is of the opinion that there is no reason to interfere with the impugned order.
However, the concerned Additional Sessions Judge, seized of Sessions Case No., arising out of the SC No. 27/2014, shall ensure that the trial is completed as expeditiously as is possible and in any case not later than within six months from today.
It is open to the respondent-State to seek imposition of any further conditions, in addition to those indicated by the High Court for ensuring compliance by the second respondent for the facilitation of his attendance during the trial.
The special leave petition is dismissed, but subject to the above terms.
Pending application(s), if any, are disposed of.
(HARSHITA UPPAL) (MATHEW ABRAHAM)
SENIOR PERSONAL ASSISTANT COURT MASTER (NSH)
2