The Delhi High Court passed an order requesting the trial court to expedite the trial in a 30-year-old case and conclude it possibly within a year.
The case pertains to an FIR lodged in the year 1993 for alleged cheating and other offences. Interestingly, the High Court had given direction for expeditious trial of the case way back in 2006.
Justice Jyoti Singh on Wednesday while passing an order on a plea against the trial court dismissed a plea seeking day-to-day hearing in the matter. However, the Additional Standing Counsel (ASC) submitted that on account of two revision petitions having been filed in this Court, the trial could not proceed further till 2015.
“Be that as it may, the present petition is disposed of requesting the Trial Court to expedite the trial and conclude the same as expeditiously as possible, considering the fact that the FIR relates back to the year 1993 and way back in 2006, this Court had directed the Trial Court to expedite the trial and conclude the same, if possible, within one year,” Justice Jyoti Singh said. The high court made it clear that counsels on both sides will render full cooperation towards the expeditious disposal of the case and no unnecessary adjournments shall be taken.
Parties agree that the Trial Court record has been sent back. Therefore, this also is not an impediment in proceeding with the hearing, Justice Jyoti Singh said in the order of September 27. Advocate Satya Narayan Vasishth, counsel for the Petitioner pointed out that way back on 20.12.2006, the High Court directed the Trial Court to expedite the trial and to conclude the same within a period of one year and thus the Trial Court erred in rejecting the request of the Petitioner for day-to-day hearing of the matter.
Complainant Sunder Kukreja filed the petition in FIR registered under section 420/468/471/120-B IPC at Police Station Lajpat Nagar, New Delhi seeking directions to the Trial Court for hearing the case on a day-to-day basis and conclude the trial within one year. It was submitted that the respondents have been delaying the completion of the cross-examination of the petitioner, which commenced in 2018 and is continuing till date.
Further, it was also submitted that the petitioner is a senior citizen. The counsel also pointed out that one of the witnesses has expired in all this while. It was further submitted that despite having brought these facts to the notice of the learned Trial Court, the request for a day-to-day hearing was turned down vide order dated March 28, 2022. Hence, the present petition.