Amrit Preet Singh vs State
2010 Latest Caselaw 3418 Del

*           IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+                          CRL. M.C. 1880/2010

                                                         Decided on 21.07.2010
IN THE MATTER OF :

AMRIT PREET SINGH                                           ..... Petitioner
                           Through: Mr. Pradeep Kumar Arya, Advocate with
                           Mr. Kamal Kant Chhabra and Mr. Narender
                           Choudhary, Advocates

                      versus

STATE                                                        ..... Respondent
                           Through: Mr. M.N. Dudeja, APP for the State with
                           IO/SI Sehdev Singh, PS Tilak Nagar.

CORAM

* HON'BLE MS.JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI

     1. Whether Reporters of Local papers may                  Yes
        be allowed to see the Judgment?

     2. To be referred to the Reporter or not?                 Yes

     3. Whether the judgment should be                         Yes
        reported in the Digest?

HIMA KOHLI, J. (Oral)

1. The present petition is filed by the petitioner under Section 482

of the Cr.PC read with Article 227 of the Constitution of India praying inter

alia for directions to the trial court to conclude the trial of the case registered

against the petitioner in FIR No.667/2007 under Sections 498A/306/34 IPC

within a reasonable time.

2. Counsel for the petitioner submits that pursuant to being

arrested in the aforesaid FIR lodged by the father of the deceased wife of the

petitioner, the petitioner is in judicial custody since 05.10.2007. Charges

were framed against the petitioner on 19.07.2008. It is submitted by the

counsel for the petitioner that till date, only one formal witness has been

examined and the main witness, i.e., PW-2, who is the father of the

deceased, is now under cross-examination. However, thereafter a number

of adjournments have been granted to the prosecution to produce the

witnesses but they are adopting dilatory tactics. Counsel for the petitioner

particularly draws the attention of this Court to an order dated 16.11.2009,

when while issuing fresh summons to PW-2, the learned ASJ noted that the

witnesses were avoiding appearance and the DCP of the area was directed to

ensure that the summoned witnesses appear on the next date of hearing.

Counsel for the petitioner states that next date of hearing in the matter is

30.07.2010 and he expresses an apprehension that on the said date also,

the prosecution may again seek an adjournment.

3. Notice. Learned APP accepts notice and assures the Court on

instructions from IO/SI Sehdev Singh, that all efforts shall be made to

expedite the examination of the witnesses of the prosecution, who are 22 in

number.

4. The right to speedy justice without harassment is a prominent

facet of Article 21 of the Constitution of India and in the event of violation of

such a right, the Court while exercising its powers under Article 227 of the

Constitution of India, can ensure enforcement of such a right by issuing

appropriate directions. Having regard to the submission made by the

petitioner, who is in judicial custody for the past 2½ years, the present

petition is disposed of with directions to the learned ASJ not to grant any

unnecessary adjournments to the prosecution, for production of witnesses

and for recording their remaining evidence. Learned ASJ is also requested

to take necessary steps to expedite the hearing in the case as far as

possible, subject to his Board.

5. A copy of this order be sent by the Registry forthwith to the

learned ASJ for perusal and compliance.

                                                         (HIMA KOHLI)
JULY   21, 2010                                             JUDGE
rkb