Kapil Sharma v. The State (NCT Of Delhi) & ORS.
$~68 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(CRL) 1505/2026 & CRL.M.A. 14745/2026 KAPIL SHARMA .....Petitioner Through:
Ms. Heena, Mr. Prince Sharma, Mr.
Anurag Singh and Mr. Sahil Sharma, Advocates.
versus THE STATE (NCT OF DELHI) & ORS.
.....Respondent Through:
Mr. Sanjay Lao, Standing Counsel (Crl) for the State.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ JAIN
O R D E R
% 11.05.2026 1.
An incident took place on 13.09.2019 in which the petitioner herein received gunshot injury at the hands of accused persons. 2.
The charge-sheet was filed on 21.12.2019 and after the case was committed, charges were framed on 17.03.2020. 3.
The limited request in the present petition is to the effect that the learned Trial Court may be requested to conduct the trial on day-to-day basis and no unnecessary adjournments may be granted to the accused. 4.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the deposition of the petitioner is already over. He, however, submits that the case is getting delayed and out of the cited 25 witnesses, so far only two witnesses have been examined in full and the deposition of PW-3, who is an eye witness, is still under-way.
W.P.(CRL) 1505/2026 1 The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 14/05/2026 at 12:52:17
5.
Learned Standing Counsel (Crl) for the State appears on advance notice and submits that there would not be any unnecessary delay from their side and they would ensure that the witnesses are produced before the learned Trial Court as per the directions of the learned Trial Court. 6.
Needless to observe, the eye witnesses have to be examined without any unnecessary delay and the learned Trial Court should, generally speaking, not grant any adjournment to defence when eye witnesses enter into witness-box, unless there is some compelling reason. 7.
After hearing arguments for some time, learned counsel for petitioner, without prejudice to his rights and contentions, does not press the present petition. He, however, submits that he may be granted liberty to file appropriate application before the learned Trial Court seeking expeditious disposal of the matter.
8.
The present petition is disposed of as not pressed, with the abovesaid liberty.
9.
Pending application also stands disposed of.
MANOJ JAIN, J MAY 11, 2026/ss/sa W.P.(CRL) 1505/2026 2 The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 14/05/2026 at 12:52:17