Ajmat @ Ajju v. State

$~12 *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ BAIL APPLN. 1956/2019 AJMAT @ AJJU ..... Petitioner Through Mr. Aditya Aggarwal, Advocate.

[[ versus STATE ..... Respondent Through Ms. Meenakshi Dahiya, APP for the State.

SI Virendra Kumar, PS Seelampur.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA

O R D E R

% 20.08.2019 1.

After some arguments, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in case directions are issued for expeditious recording of prosecution evidence, he shall not press this petition at this stage. He, however, submits that an application seeking interim bail has been filed before the Trial Court and the petitioner presently is on interim bail.

2.

In view of the above and keeping in view the totality of facts and circumstances of the case, the Trial Court is directed to expedite the recording of the prosecution evidence and endeavour to conclude the same within a period of 9 months from the next date of hearing before the Trial Court.

3.

Learned APP for the State submits that certain exhibits have been sent to FSL, Rohini and the report is awaited. BAIL APPLN. 1956/2019

4.

The Director, FSL, Rohini is directed to expedite the examination of the exhibits and submit a report through the Investigating Officer within a period of 4 weeks from today. 5.

Further, it is directed that the application seeking interim bail shall be considered by the Trial Court independent of the present order on its own merits.

6.

In view of the above directions, learned counsel for the petitioner seeks leave to withdraw the petition. 7.

Petition is, accordingly, dismissed as withdrawn with the aforesaid directions.

8.

Order Dasti under the signatures of the Court Master. SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J AUGUST 20, 2019 st BAIL APPLN. 1956/2019