Full Text
Translation output
CRL.REV.P.1137/2018
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Date of Order: February 04, 2019
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Date of Order: February 04, 2019
CRL.REV.P. 1137/2018 and Crl.M.A. 49709/2018
BHUVNESH PRAKASH SHARMA ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. R.N. Sharma, Advocate
BHUVNESH PRAKASH SHARMA ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. R.N. Sharma, Advocate
VERSUS
STATE (GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI) ..... Respondent
Through: Mr. M.P. Singh, Additional Public Prosecutor for State
Through: Mr. M.P. Singh, Additional Public Prosecutor for State
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR O R D E R (ORAL)
Impugned order of 22nd October, 2018 declines petitioner’s application for getting Suraj Mal and Dimple Ahuja summoned in defence.
Learned counsel for petitioner submits that name of Suraj Mal is very much mentioned in the suicide note and the evidence of Dimple
Ahuja is necessary to prove the financial transaction which has an important bearing on the facts of instant case. It is also stated that the case is pending before trial court for recording of evidence.
Learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent-State supports the impugned order.
Upon hearing and on perusal of the impugned order, I find that if petitioner is not allowed to get Suraj Mal and Dimple Ahuja examined and cross-examined, then his defence would be prejudiced, as the evidence of these two witnesses has a vital bearing on the merits of the
2019:DHC:736
Impugned order of 22nd October, 2018 declines petitioner’s application for getting Suraj Mal and Dimple Ahuja summoned in defence.
Learned counsel for petitioner submits that name of Suraj Mal is very much mentioned in the suicide note and the evidence of Dimple
Ahuja is necessary to prove the financial transaction which has an important bearing on the facts of instant case. It is also stated that the case is pending before trial court for recording of evidence.
Learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent-State supports the impugned order.
Upon hearing and on perusal of the impugned order, I find that if petitioner is not allowed to get Suraj Mal and Dimple Ahuja examined and cross-examined, then his defence would be prejudiced, as the evidence of these two witnesses has a vital bearing on the merits of the
2019:DHC:736
CRL.REV.P.1137/2018 case.
Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside with direction to trial court to summon Suraj Mal and Dimple Ahuja for recording of evidence on the date fixed. Let the trial court make all the endeavours to conclude the defence evidence on the date so fixed.
This petition and application are accordingly disposed of with aforesaid directions, while not commenting on merits.
Dasti.
(SUNIL GAUR)
JUDGE
FEBRUARY 04, 2019 p’ma
2019:DHC:736
Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside with direction to trial court to summon Suraj Mal and Dimple Ahuja for recording of evidence on the date fixed. Let the trial court make all the endeavours to conclude the defence evidence on the date so fixed.
This petition and application are accordingly disposed of with aforesaid directions, while not commenting on merits.
Dasti.
(SUNIL GAUR)
JUDGE
FEBRUARY 04, 2019 p’ma
2019:DHC:736
JUDGMENT