CRL.M.C. 760/2010 Page 1 of 3 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.M.C.760/2010 Decided on 09.08.2010 IN THE MATTER OF : OM PRAKASH ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Kundan Kumar Mishra, Advocate versus GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI ..... Respondent Through: Mr. M.N. Dudeja, APP for the State 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 petition is filed by the petitioner under Section 482 of the Cr.PC praying inter alia for quashing the criminal proceedings arising out of FIR No.144/1988, registered under Sections 468/471/419/420/120-B IPC with Police Station: Civil Lines, presently pending in the Court of learned ACMM, Tis Hazari Courts. 2. The main grievance of the petitioner is that the matter has gone on for about 23 years and the Trial Court has not completed recording the evidence till date. Counsel for the petitioner states that as far as the petitioner is concerned, out of 11 charge-sheets filed by the police, he is involved in charge-sheets No.2 and 10 alone, and that as far as the CRL.M.C. 760/2010 Page 2 of 3 aforesaid two charge-sheets are concerned, only 6-7 witnesses have been examined till date. 3. A Status Report has been filed by the learned APP. As per the said Status Report submitted by the ACP, Anti Kidnapping Section, Crime Branch, Delhi, during the course of investigating the matter, several accused persons were arrested and in all 11 charge-sheets have been filed before the Court. It is further stated that in respect of charge-sheet No.2, there are 11 accused and 19 witnesses and in respect of charge-sheet No.10, there are 13 accused and 36 witnesses. Most of the accused involved and the witnesses are stated to be common to each charge-sheet. It is submitted that four accused persons expired during the pendency of the trial due to which, the proceedings were delayed. As on date, 12 prosecution witnesses have been examined but the key witnesses have yet to be examined. 4. Considering the fact that the case has dragged for almost 23 years and even though an explanation is sought to be offered by stating that the demise of four of the accused persons during the pendency of the trial has delayed the proceedings in the case, the delay seems to be quite unreasonable and inordinate. Learned APP assures the Court on instructions from his client that the prosecution shall not seek any adjournment for recording the evidence of its witnesses before the learned ACMM and that all co-operation shall be rendered in expeditious disposal of the case. 5. In this view of the matter, the present petition is disposed of with directions to the learned ACMM, Tis Hazari Courts, to prioritize the CRL.M.C. 760/2010 Page 3 of 3 disposal of the case and complete recording the evidence of the prosecution witnesses as expeditiously as possible, and preferably within a period of six months from the next date of hearing, i.e., 20.09.2010 and thereafter, take further steps to record the evidence of the accused, so that the matter is ripe for arguments at the earliest. 6. A copy of this order be forwarded directly to the trial court for perusal and compliance. 7. DASTI to the State. (HIMA KOHLI) AUGUST 09, 2010 JUDGE rkb