Sanjay Chandra & ANR v. State & ORS

$~9 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(CRL) 950/2020 SANJAY CHANDRA & ANR ..... Petitioners Through:

Mr. Anuroop Chakravarti and Mr.

Vishal Gosain, Advocates.

versus STATE & ORS ..... Respondents Through:

Mr. Rahul Mehra, Senior Standing Counsel for GNCTD.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI

O R D E R

% 22.06.2020

1. The hearing was conducted through video conferencing. CRL.M.A. 7997/2020 (Exemption)

2. Exemption allowed, subject to all just exemptions.

3. The application stands disposed-off.

CRL.M.A. 7996/2020 (Exemption from court fee)

4. Exemption allowed, subject to the condition that the petitioners will file the duly sworn/attested affidavit and the requisite court fee within 72 hours from the date of resumption of the regular functioning of this Court.

5. The application stands disposed-off.

W.P.(CRL) 950/2020 & CRL.M.A. 7998/2020

6. The hearing was conducted through video conferencing.

7. The petitioners seek information apropos cases pending against them. Their representation to respondent no. 2 is under consideration. In particular, Respondent no. 3 shall comply with the directions issued

on 16.04.2020 by the learned Additional Sessions Judge in Bail Appln. No. R-1009/2020 (annexed at page no. 78 of the writ petition). The learned counsel for the petitioners relies upon the dicta of this Court in Anil Mittal vs. State (NCT of Delhi) & Ors. in WP (Crl.) 822/2020 decided on 19.05.2020, which inter alia reads as under:- "...

...

13. In future, the Director General (Prisons) is directed to keep in mind Section 269(c) of Cr. P.C. as well as judgment of the Allahabad High Court in Dharampal and another Vs. State of U.P. and another, 1981 SCC OnLine All 756 so that in similar cases accused are not forced to file writ petitions before this Court.

...

..."

8. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that despite the clear mandate of section 269(c) of Cr.PC, the relevant information has not been furnished to the petitioners. In particular, he refers to the chart furnished by respondent no. 3 titled- „list of cases' which, inter alia, does not give the complete information apropos many cases which are mentioned in the said compilation (at pp.98 to 107 of the writ petition). It is the petitioner‟s grievance that even in cases where the petitioners were not arrested or in which issues had been resolved, they were shown as persons who are required in custody. The petitioner contends that the issue be looked into by respondent no.3 in right earnest and due information be furnished to the petitioners.

9. Mr. Rahul Mehra, the learned Senior Standing Counsel for the GNCTD submits that respondent no.3 can furnish only such

information which is available to them. Let the available information be provided to the petitioner by 01.07.2020.

10.The petition, alongwith pending application, stands disposed-off in the above terms.

11.The order be uploaded on the website forthwith. Copy of the order be also forwarded to the counsels through e-mail. NAJMI WAZIRI, J JUNE 22, 2020/RW