State (Govt. Of Nct Of Delhi) vs State Of Haryana & Anr.
2011 Latest Caselaw 899 Del

*               IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+               W.P.(CRL) 223/2011 and Crl.M.A. 1848/2011

                                                        Decided on 15.02.2011
IN THE MATTER OF :

STATE (GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI)                        ..... Petitioner
                    Through: Mr. Pawan Sharma, Standing Counsel with
                    Ms. Laxmi Chauhan, Mr. Harsh Prabhakar and
                    Mr. Kushagra Arora, Advocates

                    versus


STATE OF HARYANA & ANR.                                ..... Respondents
                    Through: Mr. Manjit Singh, Advocate with
                    Mr. Yashpal Rangi, Advocate for respondent No.1.

CORAM

* HON'BLE MS.JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI

     1. Whether Reporters of Local papers may                 No
        be allowed to see the Judgment?

     2. To be referred to the Reporter or not?                No

     3. Whether the judgment should be                        No
        reported in the Digest?

HIMA KOHLI, J. (Oral)

1. The present writ petition is filed by the petitioner under Articles

226/227 of the Constitution of India read with Section 482 of the Cr.PC

praying inter alia for setting aside the orders dated 01.02.2011 and

10.02.2011 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Rohini Courts,

Delhi, in a case arising out of FIR No.166/2010 registered with Police

Station: Narnaud, Hissar, Haryana.

2. The grievance of the petitioner/Govt. of NCT of Delhi is that in

the aforesaid orders, the learned Sessions Court has directed issuance of a

notification appointing the same Advocates appointed as Special Public

Prosecutors by the Haryana Government to conduct the trial of case arising

from FIR No.166/2010 in Delhi, and has ordered the personal presence of

the Principal Secretary (Home), Govt. of NCT of Delhi, on 17.2.2011.

3. A perusal of the order dated 10.02.2011 shows that the learned

ASJ has not denied the Govt. of NCT of Delhi the prerogative appointing a

Special Public Prosecutor. The Court has only observed that in the interest

of justice, due consideration be given to the request made by respondent

No.1/State of Haryana (transferor State), unless for special reasons, the

transferee State is unable to accede to the request. Pertinently, in the

present case, learned counsel for respondent No.1 states that the Principal

Secretary, Govt. of Haryana had addressed a letter dated 09.02.2011 to the

Principal Secretary (Home), Govt. of NCT of Delhi, requesting Delhi

Government to endorse the name of a particular counsel as Special Public

Prosecutor in the present case but no response has been received thereto.

The said letter has not been placed on record by the petitioner, but a copy

thereof is handed over by the counsel for respondent No.1 and taken on

record. In the order dated 10.02.2011, directions have been issued for

appearance of the Chief Secretary, Govt. of Haryana and the Chief

Secretary, Govt. of NCT of Delhi, either in person or through an officer not

less than the rank of Principal Secretary (Home) of the respective

Governments, for them to give clarifications about the three specific queries

as set out in the said order.

4. Learned Standing Counsel for the petitioner states that a status

report dated 11.02.2011 was filed before the Sessions Court yesterday in

respect of the three queries raised. However, it is conceded that the Govt.

of NCT of Delhi and the Govt. of Haryana have not collectively taken any

administrative decision in respect of the three questions raised by the

learned ASJ, in the order dated 10.2.2011.

5. From the tone and the tenor of the orders dated 01.02.2011 and

10.02.2011, it is apparent that the learned ASJ was constrained to take

notice of the legal wranglings on the administrative side between the two

States, which appears to have adversely affected the speedy trial of the

present case, which has been transferred on the directions issued by the

Supreme Court, vide order dated 08.12.2010, from the court of the learned

ASJ, Hissar to the Court of the learned ASJ, Delhi to ensure that a free and

fair trial is conducted without any pressure from any quarter. In such

circumstances, the delay in conducting the proceedings by notifying a

Special Public Prosecutor has resulted in wastage of one and a half months,

more so when about 98 accused have been transferred from Central Jail,

Hissar and lodged in Central Jail, Tihar and the victims claim that they are

receiving constant threats from the family members of the accused.

6. It is now stated by the learned Standing Counsel for the

petitioner that a notification has been recently issued, appointing a Special

Public Prosecutor to conduct the case, but insofar as the three queries raised

for clarification, in the order dated 10.12.2010 are concerned, the Govt. of

NCT of Delhi is ready and willing to thrash out the said issues on the

administrative side in consultation with respondent No.1, if given some more

time. Pertinently, vide order dated 10.2.2011, both the States were given

one week's time to respond and matter was posted for 17.2.2011.

7. Counsel for respondent No.1 states that the Principal Secretary

(Home), State of Haryana shall be coming down to Delhi tomorrow for

sorting out the pending issues and he is ready and willing to resolve the

issue by having a meeting with the Principal Secretary (Home), Government

of NCT of Delhi. He further states that as the stand of the petitioner is very

clear that they have taken over the entire progress of the prosecution of the

present case in their hands, then the arrangement for the protection of the

victims/witnesses as also their security, both in Haryana and Delhi has to be

the subject matter of consideration of the petitioner.

8. Learned Standing Counsel for the petitioner states that it would

be appropriate if the orders dated 01.02.2011 and 10.02.2011 be kept in

abeyance for a period of three days to enable the aforesaid senior officers to

interact with each other in this duration and try to sort out the pending

administrative issues.

9. Accordingly, the present writ petition is disposed of along with

the pending application, with the directions that both, Principal Secretary

(Home), Govt. of NCT of Delhi and the Principal Secretary (Home), State of

Haryana shall sit together and resolve the three clarifications sort in the

impugned order dated 10.2.2011, as expeditiously as possible. If both the

sides are ad idem as to the stand to be taken before the learned ASJ, a joint

affidavit shall be filed in this regard before the learned ASJ by 19.02.2011.

However, if they are unable to resolve the administrative issues internally,

and the conflict persists, then the said officers shall appear before the

learned ASJ to enable them to explain their respective stands in this regard.

The present order shall be brought to the notice of the court, on the date

fixed before Sessions Court on 17.02.2011, with a request to adjourn the

matter for 19.2.2011.

10. A copy of this order be forwarded by the Registry by dispatch

rider to the Sessions Court for perusal.

DASTI under the signatures of the Private Secretary.

                                                          (HIMA KOHLI)
FEBRUARY 15, 2011                                            JUDGE
rkb