Rustam v. State

$~55 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(CRL) 499/2015 RUSTAM ..... Petitioner Through:

None.

versus STATE ..... Respondent Through:

Mr.

Sanjay Lao, ASC with SI Surender, P.S. Krishna Nagar.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. PATHAK

O R D E R

% 29.08.2016 Case has been listed on the office noting.

Vide order dated 10th March, 2015 trial court was directed to expedite the trial within a period of six months.

However, trial could not be completed within the time frame fixed by this Court. Vide order dated 7th December, 2015 time was extended by another three months. Trial court was directed to avoid granting unwarranted adjournments to counsel appearing on behalf of the parties.

Again a request has been received from the trial court to extend the time for concluding the trial. It is submitted that one of the co-accused Rustam is facing trial in two other cases at Lucknow, UP. There are seven accused persons facing trial who are being represented by different advocates.

Out of 52 witnesses Court has already examined 41 witnesses.

Case is highly contentious and witnesses are being subjected to

lengthy cross examination by the advocates.

Keeping in mind the above facts, trial court is directed to conclude the trial expeditiously and preferably within three months from today without granting unwarranted adjournments to the counsels appearing on behalf of the parties and by fixing short dates.

Copy of the order be sent to the trial court. A.K. PATHAK, J.

AUGUST 29, 2016 ga