Agnesh Verma v. State

$~57 *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ W.P.(CRL) 2301/2017 SHRI AGNESH VERMA ..... Petitioner Through Mr.Ashwin Vaish, Adv. with Mr.Vinod Pandey, Adv.

versus STATE ..... Respondent Through Mr.R.S. Kundu, ASC for State.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD GOEL

O R D E R

% 11.08.2017 1.

The petitioner has invoked the writ jurisdiction of this Court under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India read with Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (in short "Cr.PC) seeking production of the trial court record in case FIR No.42/2002, Police Station ACB, Delhi. 2.

Learned counsel has mentioned the matter before Hon'ble the Acting chief Justice in the morning.

3.

On directions, the learned Special Judge, PC Act, Tis Hazari Courts, has sent the original judgment dated 10th August, 2017 duly signed in CC No.85/2002 vide FIR No.42/2002 with a covering letter. Original record has also been received.

4.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he had the apprehensions whether in fact the judgment exists on the record. He submits that petitioner has been convicted without a judgment. He further submits

that he preferred an application under Section 353 (4) of Cr.PC which was rejected by the learned Special Judge.

5.

In the circumstances, when the judgment has been duly signed by the learned Special Judge, no further orders are required to be passed in the matter.

6.

The petition is disposed of.

7.

At this stage, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the learned Special Judge, had not allowed his application to peruse the judgment under Section 353 (4) of the Cr.P.C. In the circumstances, in case any such application is filed by the petitioner, the same shall be disposed of on the same day by the learned Special Judge, in accordance with law. 8.

Original record along with the original judgment be sent back today itself.

VINOD GOEL, J.

AUGUST 11, 2017/jitender