Full Text
Translation output
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
CRL.M.C.1886/2016& Crl.M.A.8039/2016
CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION Petitioner Represented by: Mr.Anupam S.Sharma,Spl.PP
CRL.M.C.1886/2016& Crl.M.A.8039/2016
CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION Petitioner Represented by: Mr.Anupam S.Sharma,Spl.PP
VERSUS
FREEMAN ANOSIKE ALUMA@MOON Respondent Represented by: Mr.Anoop Kr.Gupta,Adv.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MS.JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA
14.12.2016 Since 12^^ December,2016 was declared a holiday vide notification
No.701/G-4/Genl./DHC the matter is being taken up today.
The prayer ofthe petitioner CBI in the present petition is of setting aside the order dated 29^ April,2016 granting bailto the respondentin RC-
CYl 2008-E-0003 under Sections,120B and 379 IPG and Section 66 ofthe
Information Technology Act:
This Court had called for a report from the learned Trial Court explaining the reasons for delay in trial. As per the report received the til respondent had earlier been granted bail by this Court on 10 July, 2009 pursuant to which he was on bail since,5 September,2009. However due to non-appearance before the Trial Court non-bailable warrants were issued tb against the respondent on 17 November, 2014 and he was declared a
CRL.M.C.1886/2016 page 1 of2
2016:DHC:9015 proclaimed offender on 30*** June,2015. The respondent could be arrested only in 2015 where after trial re-started. As perthe report 17 witnesses have been examined and PW-18 has partly been examined and the next date fixed before the Trial Court for completion ofthe remaining prosecution evidence is 15*"^ and 16*^ December,2016. The learned Trial Court has assured that the trial would be concluded expeditiously.
Considering the fact that the trial is at the fag end and is likely to conclude within one month for the reason learned counsel forthe respondent states that the respondent is not likely to lead any defence evidence, the order dated 29^April,2016issetaside.
Petition and application are disposed ofwith a requestto learned Trial
Courtto conclude the trial as expeditiously as possible.
MUKTA GUPf^ DECEMBER 14,2016 'ga'
14.12.2016 Since 12^^ December,2016 was declared a holiday vide notification
No.701/G-4/Genl./DHC the matter is being taken up today.
The prayer ofthe petitioner CBI in the present petition is of setting aside the order dated 29^ April,2016 granting bailto the respondentin RC-
CYl 2008-E-0003 under Sections,120B and 379 IPG and Section 66 ofthe
Information Technology Act:
This Court had called for a report from the learned Trial Court explaining the reasons for delay in trial. As per the report received the til respondent had earlier been granted bail by this Court on 10 July, 2009 pursuant to which he was on bail since,5 September,2009. However due to non-appearance before the Trial Court non-bailable warrants were issued tb against the respondent on 17 November, 2014 and he was declared a
CRL.M.C.1886/2016 page 1 of2
2016:DHC:9015 proclaimed offender on 30*** June,2015. The respondent could be arrested only in 2015 where after trial re-started. As perthe report 17 witnesses have been examined and PW-18 has partly been examined and the next date fixed before the Trial Court for completion ofthe remaining prosecution evidence is 15*"^ and 16*^ December,2016. The learned Trial Court has assured that the trial would be concluded expeditiously.
Considering the fact that the trial is at the fag end and is likely to conclude within one month for the reason learned counsel forthe respondent states that the respondent is not likely to lead any defence evidence, the order dated 29^April,2016issetaside.
Petition and application are disposed ofwith a requestto learned Trial
Courtto conclude the trial as expeditiously as possible.
MUKTA GUPf^ DECEMBER 14,2016 'ga'
CRL.M.C.1886/2016 page2of2
2016:DHC:9015
2016:DHC:9015
JUDGMENT