LAWS(DLH)-2014-1-184

VIPUL GUPTA Vs. STATE

Decided On January 29, 2014
VIPUL GUPTA Appellant
V/S
STATE Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These intra-court appeals impugn the common judgment dated 14th June, 2012 of a learned Single Judge of this Court of dismissal of W.P.(C) Nos.3470/2012, 3471/2012 & 3472/2012 preferred by the appellants respectively. The said writ petitions were filed by the respective appellants assailing, i) the communication dated 13th December, 2011 of the Director of Prosecution, Delhi to the Principal Secretary (Home), seeking instructions whether the concerned Additional Public Prosecutor (APP) has to press the application filed before the Court of the learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate (ACMM), Delhi under Section 321 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C.) for withdrawal from prosecution in case FIRs No.90/2000, 99/20002 and 148/2002 registered at police station Connaught Place and Defence Colony; and, ii) the order dated 15th December, 2011 of Hon'ble the Lieutenant Governor, Delhi agreeing with the proposal in the said communication dated 13th December, 2011 not to press the applications for withdrawal of the aforesaid cases and to allow the trial thereof to proceed on merits.

(2.) These appeals are accompanied with applications for condonation of 340 days delay in re-filing thereof. Notice of the said applications only was issued. A detailed reply opposing the condonation of delay has been filed by the original complainant at whose instance the appellants were being prosecuted.

(3.) The matters came up before us on 16th January, 2014 when, without prejudice to the aspect of delay, and in the light of the judgment of the full Bench of this Court in C.S. Agarwal Vs. State, 2011 6 ILR(Del) 701, we asked the counsel for the appellants to satisfy us as to the maintainability of these appeals. On the request of the counsel for the appellants, the matter was adjourned for hearing on this aspect. We have heard the senior counsels for the appellants as well as the senior counsel for the original complainant on the aspect of delay as well as of maintainability of these appeals.