High Court of DelhiCRL.M.C./6177/2018

Harbhajan Singh Sandhu v. State & ANR.

2018-12-05Hon'Ble Mr. Justice Chander Shekhar2 pages

$~30 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.M.C. 6177/2018 HARBHAJAN SINGH SANDHU ..... Petitioner Through:

Mr. Pradeep Jain, Mr. Kunal Prakash, Mr.

Aakarsh Srivastava & Mr. Arunesh Singh, Advocates versus STATE & ANR.

..... Respondents Through:

Mr. Kamal Kumar Ghai, APP

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDER SHEKHAR

O R D E R

% 05.12.2018 CRL.M.A. 48907/2018 Allowed, subject to all just exceptions. The application is disposed of.

CRL.M.C. 6177/2018 1.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that vide order dated 14.11.2018, the Special Judge (PC Act) CBI-01, Saket Courts, New Delhi granted 60 days‟ time to deposit the amount, to comply with the order dated 18.10.2018. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that, on 14.11.2018, the petitioner was admitted to hospital, hence, could not appear

before the Appellate Court, but due to inadvertence, application for exemption of the petitioner before the Appellate Court could not be moved. However, an application was moved for extension of time to deposit the amount, which was rejected by the Appellate Court. I am not convinced with the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner. However, in the interest of justice, the petitioner is granted time till 18.12.2018 to deposit the amount, in compliance of the order dated 18.10.2018. The petitioner shall appear before the Appellate Court on the date already fixed. In case there would be any contingency and the petitioner is not able to appear, then the petitioner is bound to move an application for exemption of the petitioner from his appearance, which shall be considered by the Appellate Court in accordance with law. Further, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the matter may be referred to the mediation for the purpose of compromise. However, if both the parties agree and the Appellate Court is satisfied, the parties may be sent to mediation. 2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner, in view of the above directions, seeks permission to withdraw the petition. Petition is dismissed as withdrawn. It is clarified that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the petition. Dasti.

CHANDER SHEKHAR, J DECEMBER 05, 2018 tp