Gopal Krishna Beheti v. Central Bureau Of Investigation

' '

to 19 *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

(i) + CRL.M.C. 582/2013 & Crl.M.A.1890/2013 GOP AL KRISHNA' BEHETI ..... Petitioner Through:

Nemo versus CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION ..... Respondent Through:

Mr. Narender Mann, Special Public Prosecutor, with Mr. Manoj Pant and Ms. Utkarsha Kohli, Advocates for respondent-CBI with I.O./Dy. SP. Vipin Kumar (ii) + CRL.M.C. 745/2013 & Crl.M.A.2432/2013 GOPAL KRISHNA BEHETI ..... Petitioner Through:

Nemo versus CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION ..... Respondent Through:

Mr. Narender Mann, Special Public Prosecutor, with Mr. Manoj Pant and Ms. Utkarsha Kohli, Advocates for respondent-CHI with I.O./Dy. SP. Vipin Kumar (iii) + CRL.M.C. 1133/2013 & Crl.M.A.3472/2013 RAJENDRA KHATIR ..... Petitioner Through:

N emo versus C.B.I.

..... Respondent By:AMULYA

Through:

Mr. Narender Mann, Special Public Prosecutor, with Mr. Manoj Pant and Ms. Utkarsha Kohli, Advocates for respondent-CHI with I.O./Dy. SP. Vipin Kumar (iv) + CRL.M.C. 1143/2013 & Crl.M.A.3514/2013 NITIN BOLlA ..... Petitioner Through:

Nemo versus C.B.I.

..... Respondent Through:

Mr. Narender Mann, Special Public Prosecutor, with Mr. Manoj Pant and Ms. Utkarsha Kohli, Advocates for respondent-CHI with I.O./Dy. SP. Vipin Kumar • (v) + CRL.M.C. 1144/2013 & Crl.M.A.3516/2013 SIDIK HUSSAIN ..... Petitioner Through:

Nemo versus C.B.I.

..... Respondent Through:

Mr. Narender Mann, Special Public Prosecutor, with Mr. Manoj Pant and Ms. Utkarsha Kohli, Advocates for respondent-CBI with I.O./Dy. SP. Vipin Kumar

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR

ORDER

06.08.2015 Learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent-CHI submits that these five petitions arise out of one RC and therefore, these petitions

were taken up for hearing together and by this common order, they are being disposed of.

The order impugned m these petitions 1s the order directing framing of charge against petitioners.

Learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent-CHI further submits on instructions that the trial in the RC in question is at the fag end as the Investigating Officer of this case is under cross-examination and the next date before the trial court is 14th August, 2015. None appears on behalf of petitioners even on the second call. When this matter was taken up for hearing on 20th February, 2015, none had appeared on behalf of petitioners. It appears that petitioners are no • longer interested in pursuing these petitions. Accordingly, these five petitions and the applications are dismissed in default and for non-prosecution.

(SUNIL GAUR) JUDGE AUGUST 06, 2015 s