Bangaru Laxman vs State (Thru Cbi)
2010 Latest Caselaw 4005 Del

              * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

                        Date of Order: 30th August, 2010

           + WP (Crl.) No. 651 of 2010 & Crl. M.A. No. 440/2008

%                                                           30.08.2010

BANGARU LAXMAN                                                       ..... Petitioner
                               Through: Mr. Manish Mohan and
                               Mr. Atul Kr. Advocates

                               Versus

STATE (THROUGH CBI)                                           ..... Respondents
                               Through: Mr. Harish Gulati, Advocate for CBI

JUSTICE SHIV NARAYAN DHINGRA

1. Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

2. To be referred to the reporter or not?

3. Whether judgment should be reported in Digest?



(ORAL)


1.     By this petition, the petitioner has assailed an order dated 26 th July,

2006, of learned Special Judge taking cognizance of the offence. The order

of taking cognizance of the offence under Prevention of Corruption Act is

purely an interlocutory order. Since for the offence under Prevention of

Corruption Act, the trial procedure to be followed by the Special Judge is

akin to warrant trial procedure, no detailed reasoned order was required

for taking cognizance. There is no infirmity in the order.



WP (Crl.) No. 651 of 2010                                                  Page 1 of 2
 2.     I find that this petition, assailing a purely interlocutory order of

taking cognizance of offences, is a gross misuse of judicial process and the

petition is liable to be dismissed. It is dismissed accordingly.




August 30, 2010                          SHIV NARAYAN DHINGRA, J.

acm