SATISH GUPTA Vs. NCT OF DELHI & ORS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Cr. M.A. No. 10148/2015 (for exemption)

(2.) Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the present petition has been filed on the ground that both the courts below have passed the impugned orders on irrelevant considerations ignoring the relevant material on record. Both the courts below have made a roving inquiry while considering the case on framing of charge/discharge, as if the courts were deciding acquittal of the respondents after completion of the entire trial.

(3.) It is further submitted that the learned ASJ as well as the Trial Court have failed to appreciate that at the stage of framing of charge only a prima facie case has to be seen, however, from bare perusal of the impugned orders, it is clear that both the courts below have not only made a roving inquiry but also weighed the evidence in detail as if they were considering the acquittal or conviction and not considering the case qua framing of charge/discharge.