← Library
High Court of DelhiW.P.(CRL)/825/2018

G.D. Bhatt v. The State Through CBI

2018-03-20Hon'Ble Mr. Justice S.P.Garg3 pages

I ( / $-35 to 39 & *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ W.P.(CRL) 822/2018 RAJESH BISHT Petitioner Through :

Mr.Khalil Ansari with Mr.Sunil Sagar and Mohd.Akhtar, Advocates, versus STATE THROUGH GDI Respondent Through : Mr.Sanjeev Bhadari, SPP with Mr.Prateek Kumar, Advocate.

Ms.Nandita Rao, ASC for NCT of Delhi.

+ W.P.(CRL) 824/2018 S.K. JAISWAL Petitioner Through : Mr.Khalil Ansari with Mr.Sunil Sagar and Mohd.Akhtar, Advocates, versus STATE THROUGH CBI Respondent Through : , Mr.Sanjeev Bhadari, SPP with Mr.Prateek Kumar, Advocate.

Ms.Nandita Rao, ASC for NCT of Delhi.

+ W.P.(CRL) 825/2018 G.D. BHATT Petitioner Through : Mr.Khalil Ansari with Mr.Sunil Sagar and Mohd.Akhtar, Advocates, versus STATE THROUGH CBI Respondent Through : Mr.Sanjeev Bhadari, SPP with Mr.Prateek Kumar, Advocate.

Ms.Nandita Rao, ASC for NCT of Delhi.

+ W.P.(CRL) 829/2018 AJEET SINGH Petitioner Through : Mr.Khalil Ansari with Mr.Sunil Sagar and Mohd.Akhtar, Advocates.

W.P.(Crl.) 822/18 & connected matters Page I of 3 By:AMULYA

/ -i versus STATE THROUGH CBI Respondent Through : Mr.Sanjeev Bhadari, SPP with Mr.Prateek Kumar, Advocate.

Ms.Nandita Rao, ASC forNCT of Delhi.

+ W.P.(CRL) 830/2018 NITINCHAUHAN Petitioner Through : Mr.Khalil Ansari with Mr.Sunil Sagar and Mohd.Akhtar, Advocates, I \ '

r versus STATE TITROUGH GBI Respondent Through : Mr.Sanjeev Bhadari, SPP with Mr.Prateek Kumar, Advocate.

Ms.Nandita Rao, ASC for NOT of Delhi.

+ W.PTCRL) 835/2018 NEERAJ KUMAR Petitioner Through : Mr.Khalil Ansari with Mr.Sunil Sagar and Mohd.Akhtar, Advocates, versus STATE THROUGH CBI Respondent Through : Mr.Sanjeev Bhadari, SPP with Mr.Prateek Kumar, Advocate.

Ms.Nandita Rao, ASC for NCT of Delhi.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.P.GARG

ORDER

% 20.03.2018 1.

The above writ petitions have been filed by the petitioners under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with Section A82 Cr.P.C. seeking parole for a particular duration in case bearing R.C.No.6(s)/2009 registered under Sections 120 B read with Sections W. p. (CrI.) 822/18 & comected matters P - of 3

302/364/201 IPC and Sections 364/302/201/218 IPC to engage an advocate to file SLP.

2.

Learned SPP appearing for CBI informs that NCT,of Delhi is a necessary party and be impleaded in the present proceedings. 3.

At the oral request of learned counsel for the petitioner, NCT of Delhi is impleaded as party. Amended memo of parties shall be filed during the course of the day.

4.

Ms.Nandita Rao, ASC puts appearance on behalf of NCT of Delhi.

5.

During the course of arguments, it was informed that the representations filed by the petitioners seeking parole before the competent authority are pending and no decision so far has been taken.

6.

It is agreed during hearing that the competent authority shall dispose of the representations of the petitioners for consideration of parole on merits within two weeks.

7.

Learned counsel for the petitioners has no objection to the disposal of the petitions with the above directions. 8.

The writ petitions are accordingly disposed of with the directions that representations of the petitioners seeking parole shall be decided by the competent authority on merits within two weeks. ^.GARG, J.

MARCH 20, 2018/sa W.P.(Crl.) 822/IS & connected matters