Vandana Gupta v. The State Govt Of NCT Of Delhi & ORS

$~3 *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ W.P.(CRL) 3199/2017 VANDANA GUPTA ..... Petitioner Through:

Mr. Jayant Bhatt, Ms. Jyoti Sharma and Ms. Mekhala Pande, Advocates versus THE STATE GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS. ..... Respondents Through:

Mr. Rahul Mehra, Standing Counsel (Crl.) for State with Mr. Tushar Sannu and Mr. Chaitanya Gosain, Advocates with SI Sanjay Gupta, I.O and Insp. Anant Kiran, PS Sabzi Mandi.

CORAM:

JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR JUSTICE I.S.MEHTA

O R D E R

% 21.02.2018

1. A status report in a sealed cover has been tendered by Mr. Rahul Mehra learned Standing counsel for the State. It contains exhaustive details of the intensive investigation undertaken by the Station House Officer ('SHO') of Police Station ('PS') Sabzi Mandi to trace the son of the Petitioner. Having perused the contents of the status report the Court appreciates that the details cannot be shared with the Petitioner at this stage. This status report therefore be kept in a sealed cover by the Registry and not be permitted for inspection except under orders of the Court.

2. There is another status report dated 21st February 2018 which has been shared with the counsel for the Petitioner which inter alia states that on 4th

January, 2018 an application was moved before the learned Metropolitan Magistrate ('MM') for recording the consent of the Petitioner and her husband to conduct their polygraph test, which they declined. Even counsel for the Petitioner does not dispute this fact.

3. Counsel for the Petitioner expressed concern that the status reports being presented to this Court by the police are mere cut and paste versions of the earlier status reports with no real progress being made in finding out the whereabouts of her missing son. Having gone through the status reports presented thus far, including the one presented to it today in a sealed cover, the Court is unable to accept the above submission. The Petitioner should rest assured that every possible effort is being made by the police from all possible angles to unearth the truth.

4. With the FIR having been registered, the police is bound to keep the Metropolitan Magistrate (MM) concerned apprised of the progress of investigation. The Court directs that the learned MM should review the progress of the investigation and for that purpose list the matter at least once every month.

5. No further directions are called for. The petition is disposed of. S. MURALIDHAR, J.

I.S. MEHTA, J.

FEBRUARY 21, 2018 nd