1 ITEM NO.20 COURT NO.1 SECTION II-D S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s).1422/2025 [Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 13-11-2024 in BA No.4110/2024 passed by the High Court of Delhi at New Delhi] MAHESH KHATRI @ BHOLI Petitioner(s) VERSUS STATE NCT OF DELHI Respondent(s) FOR ADMISSION IA No. 25948/2025 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES WITH SLP(Crl) No. 8799/2025 (II-D) MD. HEYDAITULLAH Petitioner(s) VERSUS NATIONAL INVESTIGATION AGENCY Respondent(s) IA No. 129923/2025 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT SLP(Crl) No. 4276/2025 (II-A) KAILASH RAMCHANDANI Petitioner(s) VERSUS STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR. Respondent(s) IA No. 55791/2025 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. IA No. 55789/2025 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES IA No. 55787/2025 - PERMISSION TO FILE LENGTHY LIST OF DATES Date : 06-01-2026 These matters were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JOYMALYA BAGCHI For Petitioner(s) Mr. Trideep Pais, Sr. Adv.
2 Ms. Sanya Kumar, Adv. Ms. Saloni Ambastha, Adv. Mr. Harsh Jain, Adv. Ms. Sakshi Jain, Adv. Ms. Ankita Gupta, AOR Mr. Ishan Kapoor, Adv. Ms. Joshini Tuli, Adv. Mr. Joginder Tuli, Adv. Mrs. Gargi Khanna, AOR Mr. Kartik Murukutla, Adv. Mr. Farrukh Rasheed, AOR Mr. Abu Bakr Sabbaq, Adv. Ms. Shifa, Adv. For Respondent(s) Ms. Aishwarya Bhati, A.S.G. Mr. Sagar Bhandare, Adv. Ms. Manisha C., Adv. Ms. Ruchi Kholi, Adv. Mr. Bhuvan Kapoor, Adv. Mr. Raman Yadav, Adv. Ms. Chitrangda Rashtravara, Adv. Mr. Gyanendra Singh, Adv. Mr. Digvijay Dam, Adv. Mr. Anmol Chandan, Adv. Mr. Rohit Khare, Adv. Mr. Arvind Kumar Sharma, AOR Mr. G.Siddi Ramulu, Adv. Mr. Satya Darshi Sanjay, A.S.G. Ms. Indira Bhakar, Adv. Mr. Santosh Ramdurg, Adv. Mr. Shreekant Neelappa Terdal, AOR Mr. Piyush Beriwal, Adv. Mr. Raman Yadav, Adv. Ms. Sunanda Shukla, Adv. Mr. Jagdish Chandra, Adv. Mr. K. Kolwar, Adv. Mr. Shubham Prakash Mishra, Adv. Mr. Shubh Sharma, Adv. Mr. Mukesh Kumar Maroria, AOR Mr. Aniruddha Deshmukh, Adv. Mr. Siddharth Dharmadhikari, Adv. Mr. Aaditya Aniruddha Pande, AOR Mr. Shrirang B. Varma, Adv. Ms. Swati Ghildiyal, AOR Mr. Nimesh Bhatt, Adv.
3 Mr. Jayant Mohan, AOR Mr. Kanhaiya Singhal, Adv. Mr. Prasanna, Adv. Mr. Ajay, Adv. Ms. Nivedita Tiwari, Adv. Mr. Kanav, Adv. Ms. Vani Singhal, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R SLP (Crl.) No(s).1422/2025 1. Counsel for the parties jointly state that the petitioner has since been acquitted by the Trial Court vide judgment dated 04.07.2025, passed in Sessions Case No.112/2022. 2. As such, the instant petition has been rendered infructuous and the same stands disposed of as such. 3. As a result, the pending interlocutory application also stands disposed of. SLP (Crl.) No(s).8799/2025 1. The petitioner has been in custody since October, 2022. The trial is yet to formally commence as the arguments on framing charges are going on, and for that purpose, the case is now listed from 05.02.2026 to 07.02.2026. On a further query, we are informed that, as per the chargesheet, the prosecution proposes to examine 125 witnesses. 2. It is also not in dispute that the designated court before which the trial is pending has several other pending trials also. In this scenario, it may be far-fetched to presume that the trial will be concluded within a year or so. The inordinate delay in the conclusion of the trial would give rise to a legitimate submission on behalf of the petitioner to release him on bail, for he cannot be kept in custody indefinitely. 3. It is in such like eventual backdrop that this Court is separately considering a proposal for the establishment of Special Courts where trial can be conducted on a day-to-day basis. That matter is coming up for hearing on 10.02.2026.
4 4. It seems to us that while a larger issue of establishing designated courts on Pan-India basis as well as the issue re: apportionment of expenditure for establishment or recurring expenditure, between the Union of India and the State Governments, would be examined in that matter, the instant case can be dealt with separately if the Union of India or the Government of NCT of Delhi agrees to set up one Special Court with full logistic support (in addition to the already sanctioned cadre strength of Delhi Higher Judicial Services) so that a dedicated Court to deal with such like cases on day-to-day basis can be made functional. 5. Learned Additional Solicitor General of India seeks and is granted one week’s time to have instructions in that regard. 6. Post the matter for further hearing on 21.01.2026. SLP(Crl) No. 4276/2025 1. The petitioner is one of the accused in CR No.19/2019, registered at P.S. Purada, Gadchiroli for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 302, 353, 143, 147, 148, 149, 120B, 427 of the IPC, Section 5 read with 28 of the Arms Act; Sections 4 and 5 of Indian Explosives Act, Section 135 of the Maharashtra Police Act and Sections 16, 18, 20 and 23 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA). The allegations are that the petitioner has sold wires, etc. and other incriminating materials to the Naxalites. The petitioner was arrested on 29.06.2019. It seems that the petitioner’s co-accused sought discharge under MCOCA, and their application was allowed, but those orders have been eventually set aside by this Court, and the charges under MCOCA have been restored. As a result, the charges could be framed only in the month of May, 2024 and then in October, 2025. The prosecution proposes to examine 146 witnesses, of which only one witness has been examined so far. 2. The conclusion of the trial, in such circumstances, will take a reasonably long time. 3. The petitioner does not have other criminal antecedents.
5 It seems to us that, subject to such conditions which may ensure that the petitioner does not misuse the concession of bail, he can be released on bail with liberty to the concerned Authorities to closely monitor and observe his activities. 4. Consequently, without going into the merits of the case at this stage, the petitioner is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds to the satisfaction of the Trial Court, and further subject to the following conditions: (i) The petitioner shall stay at Gurunanak Niwas, Ram Nagar, Kurkheda, Gadchiroli and shall not leave his native place without prior permission of the Trial Court except for attending the trial. (ii) The petitioner shall regularly report to the Police Station Purada, Gadchiroli. He shall also give his mobile number to the Police Authorities to contact him. (iii) The petitioner or his counsel will not delay the trial, and they shall not make any request for adjournment for cross-examination of the witnesses or otherwise. (iv) The petitioner shall not make any direct or indirect attempt to contact the witnesses. 5. If it is found that the petitioner has violated any of the above-mentioned conditions or he is attempting to re-establish his alleged contact with the co-accused or their organisations, it is made clear that the bail granted to him today by this Court shall be liable to be cancelled. 6. The Special Leave Petition stands disposed of accordingly. 7. As a result, the pending interlocutory applications also stand disposed of. (SATISH KUMAR YADAV) (PREETHI T.C.) ADDITIONAL REGISTRAR ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
ITEM NO.10 COURT NO.1 SECTION II-D S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s).1422/2025 [Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 13-11-2024 in BA No.4110/2024 passed by the High Court of Delhi at New Delhi] MAHESH KHATRI @ BHOLI Petitioner(s) VERSUS STATE NCT OF DELHI Respondent(s) (IA No.25948/2025 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES) WITH SLP(Crl) No. 8799/2025 (II-D) (IA No. 129923/2025 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT) SLP(Crl) No. 4276/2025 (II-A) (IA No. 55791/2025 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T., IA No. 55789/2025 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES, IA No.55787/2025 - PERMISSION TO FILE LENGTHY LIST OF DATES) Date : 16-12-2025 These matters were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JOYMALYA BAGCHI For Petitioner(s) :Mr. Trideep Pais, Sr. Adv. Ms. Sanya Kumar, Adv. Ms. Saloni Ambastha, Adv. Mr. Harsh Jain, Adv. Ms. Sakshi Jain, Adv. Ms. Ankita Gupta, AOR Mr. Ishan Kapoor, Adv. Ms. Joshini Tuli, Adv. Mr. Joginder Tuli, Adv. Mrs. Gargi Khanna, AOR Mr. Kartik Murukuthla, Adv. Mr. Farrukh Rasheed, AOR Ms. Shifa, Adv. 1
Mr. Abu Bakr Sabbaq, Adv. For Respondent(s) :Mr. Aniruddha Deshmukh, Adv. Mr. Siddharth Dharmadhikari, Adv. Mr. Aaditya Aniruddha Pande, AOR Mr. Shrirang B. Varma, Adv. Mr. S D Sanjay, A.S.G. Ms. Swati Ghildiyal, AOR Mr. Nimesh Bhatt, Adv. Ms. Aishwarya Bhati, A.S.G. Ms. Ruchi Kholi, Adv. Mr. Bhuvan Kapoor, Adv. Mr. Raman Yadav, Adv. Ms. Chitrangda Rashtravara, Adv. Mr. Gyanendra Singh, Adv. Mr. Digvijay Dam, Adv. Mr. Anmol Chandan, Adv. Mr. Rohit Khare, Adv. Ms. Manisha Chava, Adv. Ms. Shagun Thakur, Adv. Mr. Annirudha Singh, Adv. Mr. Arvind Kumar Sharma, AOR Mr. G. Siddi Ramulu, Adv. Mr. Satya Darshi Sanjay, A.S.G. Mr. Piyush Beriwal, Adv. Mr. Raman Yadav, Adv. Ms. Sunanda Shukla, Adv. Mr. Jagdish Chandra, Adv. Mr. Santosh Ramdurg, Adv. Ms. Indira Bhakar, Adv. Mr. Khushal Kolwar, Adv. Mr. Shubh Sharma, Adv. Mr. Shubham Prakash Mishra, Adv. Ms. Parthvi Ahuja, Adv. Mr. Mukesh Kumar Maroria, AOR Mr. Shreekant Neelappa Terdal, AOR Mr. Sudhir Bisla, Adv. Mr. Jayant Mohan, AOR Ms. Sumitra Bisla, Adv. Ms. Meenakshi Chatterjee, Adv. Ms. Adya Shree Dutta, Adv. Ms. Dorjee Ongmu Lachungpa, Adv. Mr. Ankit Agrawal, Adv. Mr. Kanhaiya Singhal, Adv. Mr. Rishabh Bhardwaj, Adv. Mr. Prasanna, Adv. Ms. Vani Singhal, Adv. 2
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R 1. In continuation of the previous orders, Ms. Aishwarya Bhati and Mr. S.D. Sanjay, learned Additional Solicitor General of India have handed over some documents and brief notes with respect to the progress made so far for the purpose of creating exclusive Special Courts to try offences under various Central Penal Laws. 2. We are hopeful that with the commitment shown by the Union of India, for providing infrastructural and the recurring expenditure, necessary steps for the establishment of the Special Courts shall be taken. We expect all the stakeholders to do the needful within four weeks. 3. Post these matters re: Creation of Special Exclusive Courts on 10.02.2026. 4. So far as the NCT of Delhi is concerned, it is submitted by the learned ASG that 16 Courts have been identified and the same are likely to be completed/established within a period of three months. 5. Learned counsel for the High Court of Delhi seeks and is granted three weeks’ time to place on record the affidavit. 6. As regards the petitioners’ prayer for bail, post the matters for hearing on 06.01.2026. 7. During the course of the hearing, this has also transpired that in matters of grave offences under the Central Penal Laws, where the organised professional/hardcore criminals are involved, they take undue advantage of the territorial jurisdictional issues in NCR. Sometimes the offence is committed in ‘A’ State and its 3
trials are traceable in ‘B’ or ‘C’ State also. However, which police or agency should take cognizance of the matter for prompt investigation or which Court should be the competent jurisdictional Court, becomes a debatable issue in the ensuing criminal trial. The eventual benefit goes to the unscrupulous criminals, which may not be in the interest of society or the nation. It seems that the issue requires consideration before the relevant quarters, including the desirability of the formulation of an effective law for optimum utilization of the existing legal architecture. (ARJUN BISHT) (PREETHI T.C.) ASTT. REGISTRAR-cum-PS ASSISTANT REGISTRAR 4
ITEM NO.8+9 COURT NO.2 SECTION II-D S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s).1422/2025 [Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 13-11-2024 in BA No.4110/2024 passed by the High Court of Delhi at New Delhi] MAHESH KHATRI @ BHOLI Petitioner(s) VERSUS STATE NCT OF DELHI Respondent(s) (IA No.25948/2025 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES) WITH SLP(Crl) No.8799/2025 (II-D) (IA No. 129923/2025 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT) Item No.9 Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s).4276/2025 (IA No. 55791/2025 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T., IA No. 55789/2025 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES, IA No.55787/2025 - PERMISSION TO FILE LENGTHY LIST OF DATES) Date : 18-11-2025 These matters were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA KANT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UJJAL BHUYAN HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NONGMEIKAPAM KOTISWAR SINGH For Petitioner(s) :Mr. Ishan Kapoor, Adv. Ms. Joshini Tuli, Adv. Mr. Joginder Tuli, Adv. Mrs. Gargi Khanna, AOR Mr. Lalit Khanna, Adv. Mr. Kartik Murukutla, Adv. Mr. Farrukh Rasheed, AOR Ms. Shifa, Adv. Mr. Trideep Pais, Sr. Adv. Ms. Sanya Kumar, Adv. Ms. Saloni Ambastha, Adv. Mr. Harsh Jain, Adv. Ms. Sakshi Jain, Adv. Ms. Ankita Gupta, AOR 1
For Respondent(s) :Mr. S. D. Sanjay, A.S.G. Mr. Khushal Kolwar, Adv. Mr. Shubham Prakash Mishra, Adv. Ms. Nikita Sethi, Adv. Mr. Divyam Aggarwal, Adv. Mr. Mukesh Kumar Maroria, AOR Mr. Piyush Beriwal, Adv. Mr. Raman Yadav, Adv. Ms. Sunanda Shukla, Adv. Mr. Jagdish Chandra, Adv. Ms. Aishwarya Bhati, A.S.G. Ms. Ruchi Kholi, Adv. Mr. Bhuvan Kapoor, Adv. Mr. Raman Yadav, Adv. Ms. Chitrangda Rashtravara, Adv. Mr. Gyanendra Singh, Adv. Mr. Arvind Kumar Sharma, AOR Mr. G. Siddi Ramulu, Adv. Mr. Rohit Khare, Adv. Mr. Digvijay Dam, Adv. Mr. Anmol Chandan, Adv. Ms. Indira Bhakar, Adv. Mr. Santosh Ramdurg, Adv. Mr. Shreekant Neelappa Terdal, AOR Mr. Sudhir Bisla, Adv. Mr. Jayant Mohan, AOR Mr. Nilesh Kumar, Adv. Ms. Adya Shree Dutta, Adv. Ms. Meenakshi Chatterjee, Adv. Ms. Dorjee Ongmu Lachungpa, Adv. Ms. Sumitra Bisla, Adv. Mr. Aniruddha Deshmukh, Adv. Mr. Siddharth Dharmadhikari, Adv. Mr. Aaditya Aniruddha Pande, AOR Mr. Shrirang B. Varma, Adv. Mr. Kanhaiya Singhal, AOR Ms. Vani Singhal, Adv. Ms. Shatakshi Singh, Adv. Ms. Avantika Shankar, Adv. Mr. Prasanna Pulkit Jolly, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R 1. Ms. Aishwarya Bhati, learned Additional Solicitor General of 2
India has, at the outset, pointed out that there are some inadvertent mistakes in the earlier status report on Special Courts filed by MHA. She has, however, filed a revised and corrected status report today in Court. The same is taken on record. 2. The Registry is directed to return the earlier status report of MHA, in which some mistakes are pointed out. 3. The matters have been deliberated at a considerable length in open Court. We place our appreciation on record for the initiative already taken by Ms. Aishwarya Bhati and Mr. S.D. Sanjay, learned Additional Solicitor General of India. They have assured us that the ongoing proposal/process will be expedited, and hopefully before the next date, a firm decision shall be taken. 4. Post the matters on 16.12.2025 (NMD). (ARJUN BISHT) (PREETHI T.C.) ASTT. REGISTRAR-cum-PS ASSISTANT REGISTRAR 3
ITEM NO.11 COURT NO.2 SECTION II-A S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s).4276/2025 [Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 05-03-2024 in CRLA No.1249/2023 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay] KAILASH RAMCHANDANI Petitioner(s) VERSUS STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ANR. Respondent(s) (IA No. 55791/2025 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T., IA No. 55789/2025 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES, IA No.55787/2025 - PERMISSION TO FILE LENGTHY LIST OF DATES) Date : 14-10-2025 This matter was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA KANT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JOYMALYA BAGCHI For Petitioner(s) :Mr. Trideep Pais, Sr. Adv. Ms. Sanya Kumar, Adv. Ms. Saloni Ambastha, Adv. Mr. Harsh Jain, Adv. Ms. Sakshi Jain, Adv. Ms. Ankita Gupta, AOR For Respondent(s) :Mr. Aniruddha Deshmukh, Adv. Mr. Siddharth Dharmadhikari, Adv. Mr. Aaditya Aniruddha Pande, AOR Mr. Shrirang B. Varma, Adv. Ms. Aishwarya Bhati, A.S.G. Ms. Poornima Singh, Adv. Mr. Anirudh Singh, Adv. Ms. Shagun Thakur, Adv. Ms. Ruchi Kohli, Adv. Ms. Chitrangda Rashtravara, Adv. Mr. Bhuvan Kapoor, Adv. Mr. Raman Yadav, Adv. Mr. Gyanendra Singh, Adv. Mr. Rohit Khare, Adv. Mr. Digvijay Dam, Adv. 1
Mr. Anmol Chandan, Adv. Mr. Arvind Kumar Sharma, AOR Mr. G. Siddi Ramulu, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R 1. Learned Additional Solicitor General of India seeks more time for taking further effective steps in terms of the affidavit dated 04.09.2025 filed on behalf of the National Investigating Agency. 2. In the interest of justice, three weeks’ more time is granted to the Authorities to take a firm and final decision in principle for the establishment of exclusive Courts. 3. Meanwhile, the status report with respect to the ongoing trial against the petitioner should also be filed. 4. Post the matter on 18.11.2025. (ARJUN BISHT) (PREETHI T.C.) ASTT. REGISTRAR-cum-PS ASSISTANT REGISTRAR 2
ITEM NO.10 COURT NO.2 SECTION II-D S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s).1422/2025 [Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 13-11-2024 in BA No. 4110/2024 passed by the High Court of Delhi at New Delhi] MAHESH KHATRI @ BHOLI Petitioner(s) VERSUS STATE NCT OF DELHI Respondent(s) (IA No.25948/2025 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES) WITH SLP(Crl) No. 8799/2025 (II-D) (IA No. 129923/2025 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT) Date : 14-10-2025 These matters were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA KANT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JOYMALYA BAGCHI For Petitioner(s) :Mr. Ishan Kapoor, Adv. Ms. Joshini Tuli, Adv. Mr. Joginder Tuli, Adv. Mr. Lalit Khanna, Adv. Mrs. Gargi Khanna, AOR Mr. Kartik Murukutla, Adv. Mr. Farrukh Rasheed, AOR Mr. Abu Bakr Sabbaq, Adv. Mr. Shakeel Ahmed, Adv. For Respondent(s) :Mr. S. D. Sanjay, A.S.G. Mr. Mukesh Kumar Maroria, AOR Mr. Piyush Beriwal, Adv. Mr. Raman Yadav, Adv. Ms. Sunanda Shukla, Adv. Mr. Jagdish Chandra, Adv. Ms. Aishwarya Bhati, A.S.G. Ms. Poornima Singh, Adv. Mr. Anirudh Singh, Adv. Ms. Shagun Thakur, Adv. Ms. Ruchi Kohli, Adv. 1
Mr. Bhuvan Kapoor, Adv. Mr. Raman Yadav, Adv. Mr. Gyanendra Singh, Adv. Ms. Chitrangda Rashtravara, Adv. Mr. Arvind Kumar Sharma, AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R List on 18.11.2025. (ARJUN BISHT) (PREETHI T.C.) ASTT. REGISTRAR-cum-PS ASSISTANT REGISTRAR 2
1 ITEM NO.7 COURT NO.2 SECTION II-D S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s).1422/2025 [Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 13-11-2024 in BA No.4110/2024 passed by the High Court of Delhi at New Delhi] MAHESH KHATRI @ BHOLI Petitioner(s) VERSUS STATE NCT OF DELHI Respondent(s) FOR ADMISSION IA No. 25948/2025 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES WITH SLP(Crl) No. 8799/2025 (II-D) IA No. 129923/2025 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT Date : 12-09-2025 These matters were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA KANT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JOYMALYA BAGCHI For Petitioner(s) Mr. Ishan Kapoor, Adv. Ms. Joshini Tuli, Adv. Mr. Joginder Tuli, Adv. Mrs. Gargi Khanna, AOR Mr. Lalit Khanna, Adv. Mr. Karthik Murukutla, Adv. Mr. Farrukh Rasheed, AOR Mr. Abu Bakr Sabaq, Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. S. D. Sanjay, A.S.G. Mr. Mukesh Kumar Maroria, AOR Mr. Udai Khanna, Adv. Mr. Piyush Beriwal, Adv. Mr. Raman Yadav, Adv. Ms. Sunanda Shukla, Adv. Mr. Jagdish Chandra, Adv. Mr. Khushal Kolwar, Adv. Mr. Shubham Prakash Mishra, Adv. Ms. Aishwarya Bhati, A.S.G. Ms. Ruchi Kohli, Adv.
2 Mr. Bhuvan Kapoor, Adv. Mr. Raman Yadav, Adv. Mr. Gyanendra Singh, Adv. Ms. Chitrangda Rashtravara, Adv. Mr. Arvind Kumar Sharma, AOR Ms. Shagun Thakur, Adv. Mr. Anirudh Singh, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R 1. Ms. Aishwarya Bhati and Mr. S.D. Sanjay, learned Additional Solicitors General of India, representing NIA and NCT of Delhi respectively are present in Court. 2. With reference to the issues raised in these matters or in the other connected matters, which are now coming up for hearing on 14.10.2025, both the learned Additional Solicitors General of India assure that a joint meeting will be held, and a proposal with respect to the establishment of Exclusive Courts to conduct expeditious trials under the special Statutes shall be considered. 3. Such a meeting shall be conducted at the level of the concerned Secretary of the Government of India and heads of the special forces including the Commissioner of Police, Delhi will attend the same. Both the learned Additional Solicitors General of India shall also be invited in the said meeting. 4. The Chief Secretaries and the Home Secretaries of the State Governments are also required to attend the aforesaid meeting. The outcome thereof shall be placed before us by way of a Status Report. 5. Post these matters for hearing on 14.10.2025. (SATISH KUMAR YADAV) (PREETHI T.C.) ADDITIONAL REGISTRAR ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
1 ITEM NO.15 COURT NO.2 SECTION II-A S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s).4276/2025 [Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 05-03-2024 in CRLA No.1249/2023 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay] KAILASH RAMCHANDANI Petitioner(s) VERSUS STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ANR. Respondent(s) IA No. 55791/2025 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. IA No. 55789/2025 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES IA No. 55787/2025 - PERMISSION TO FILE LENGTHY LIST OF DATES Date : 04-09-2025 This matter was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA KANT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JOYMALYA BAGCHI For Petitioner(s) Mr. Trideep Pais, Sr. Adv. Ms. Sanya Kumar, Adv. Ms. Saloni Ambastha, Adv. Mr. Harsh Jain, Adv. Ms. Sakshi Jain, Adv. Ms. Ankita Gupta, AOR For Respondent(s) Ms. Aishwarya Bhati, A.S.G. Mr. Rohit Khare, Adv. Mr. Digvijay Dam, Adv. Mr. Anmol Chandan, Adv. Mr. Arvind Kumar Sharma, AOR Mr. G.Siddi Ramulu, Adv. Mr. Aniruddha Deshmukh, Adv. Mr. Siddharth Dharmadhikari, Adv. Mr. Aaditya Aniruddha Pande, AOR Mr. Shrirang B. Varma, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R 1. Learned Additional Solicitor General of India states that an affidavit by the Ministry of Home Affairs shall be filed during the course of the day.
2 2. Let an advance copy of the same be handed over to learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner. 3. Post the matter for hearing on 14.10.2025(NMD). (SATISH KUMAR YADAV) (PREETHI T.C.) ADDITIONAL REGISTRAR ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
1 ITEM NO.11 COURT NO.2 SECTION II-D S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s).1422/2025 [Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 13-11-2024 in BA No.4110/2024 passed by the High Court of Delhi at New Delhi] MAHESH KHATRI @ BHOLI Petitioner(s) VERSUS STATE NCT OF DELHI Respondent(s) FOR ADMISSION IA No. 25948/2025 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES Date : 24-07-2025 This matter was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA KANT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JOYMALYA BAGCHI For Petitioner(s) Mr. Ishan Kapoor, Adv. Ms. Joshini Tuli, Adv. Mr. Joginder Tuli, Adv. Mrs. Gargi Khanna, AOR Mr. Lalit Khanna, Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. S. D. Sanjay, A.S.G. Mr. Mukesh Kumar Maroria, AOR Mr. Udai Khanna, Adv. Mr. Piyush Beriwal, Adv. Mr. Raman Yadav, Adv. Ms. Sunanda Shukla, Adv. Mr. Jagdish Chandra, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R 1. The petitioner has approached this Court seeking enlargement on bail in FIR No. 96/2021, registered at P.S. Narela under Sections 307, 386, 506 and 34 of the IPC and Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act. 2. The petitioner was branded as a hardened criminal as there were 55 criminal cases registered against him, mostly involving heinous crimes. He was also convicted in two such cases.
2 It is in this backdrop that we declined him bail vide the order dated 03.02.2025. At the same time, having regard to the right to speedy trial, flowing from Article 21 of the Constitution, we directed the prosecution to show cause as to why a mechanism for speedy trial be not in place. It is in furtherance of the orders passed by this Court from time to time that an Additional Affidavit has been filed by the DCP, Outer North District, Delhi, inter alia , pointing out that a total of 288 cases are pending trial in NCT of Delhi, out of which charges have been framed in only 108 cases. In 180 cases, the charges are yet to be framed. It is further explained that only 25% of the cases have reached the stage of commencement of prosecution evidence. It is candidly acknowledged that there is a gap of three to four years between the framing of charges and commencement of the prosecution evidence. 3. The affidavit highlights that due to multiplicity of offences, jurisdictions, and legal classifications, different criminal cases involving members of the same gang are being tried before different courts, including regular Sessions Courts, Special NDPS Courts, and Special MCOCA Courts. One of the factors prolonging the trials, as mentioned in the affidavit, is that the designated courts handle other routine matters such as IPC/BNS offences, EOW matters, ED cases etc. and, thus, these courts are burdened with multiple sensitive matters. A pointed reference has been made to the provisions of the new Criminal Procedure Law to underscore the importance of speedy trial. 4. The affidavit further seeks a direction from this Court for the establishment of Dedicated Court Complexes within the jail premises to conduct the trial of criminal gang-related cases and to issue directions for : (a) Speedy trial and conviction of the UTP gang members and kingpins. (b) Fewer opportunities or grounds for seeking bail on the ground of delays in trial proceedings. (c) Better control over safety and security measures at dedicated court premises, enabling better safety
3 for witnesses as well as accused persons. (d) Expeditious cognizance in chargesheets filed by police against gang members etc. (e) Reducing the opportunities for the generation of reels and other social media content glamourizing the criminals’ lives, which are observed when gang-related criminals are transported from jails to court complexes at various locations. 5. We have heard learned Additional Solicitor General of India with reference to the above-mentioned affidavit. 6. While there can be no doubt that the establishment of dedicated courts for speedy trial of hardened criminals or professional gangsters so that the courts are not confronted with a situation to release them on bail; enhanced control over safety and security including of the witnesses; expeditious cognizance of a matter where the chargesheet has been filed, and reduction in generation of social media contents are some of the effective steps which are a need of hour. However, a holistic view is required to be taken by all the stakeholders, especially the Union of India, the Government of NCT of Delhi, and the High Court of Delhi (with reference to the cases pending in the NCT of Delhi). While the High Court would never object to providing speedy trial by establishing dedicated courts for this purpose, this can only happen provided that the Union of India and the Government of NCT of Delhi resolve to establish Fast Track Courts for trial of these cases. For this, additional posts of Judicial Officers in the Superior Judicial Services will have to be created; alternatively, a separate ad hoc cadre for such courts may have to be evolved. The infrastructural facilities, secretarial assistance, and other requisite staff that may be required for the Presiding Officer of the Court must also be provided. 7. It goes without saying that, keeping in view the pendency of 288 trials against gangsters etc., there will have to be an appropriate strength of courts to ensure that these cases can be
4 equitably distributed and then trials can be taken on a day-to-day basis. If such a decision is taken by the appropriate authorities, it seems to us that all the pending trials can be brought to an end for which some more directions like compulsory appearance of the defence counsel, dispensation of adjournments, and a time-line for the purpose of completion of investigation, filing of chargesheet, framing of charges, proper use of IPC Rules etc. will also be issued at an appropriate stage. 8. For the purpose of effectivity of this order, let notice be issued to the Union of India through the Secretary, Ministry of Home Affairs, returnable on 12.09.2025. 9. On our asking, Mr. S.D. Sanjay, learned Additional Solicitor General, accepts notice on behalf of the Union of India. (SATISH KUMAR YADAV) (PREETHI T.C.) ADDITIONAL REGISTRAR ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
ITEM NO.4 COURT NO.2 SECTION II-A S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s).4276/2025 [Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 05-03-2024 in CRLA No.1249/2023 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay] KAILASH RAMCHANDANI Petitioner(s) VERSUS STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ANR. Respondent(s) (IA No. 55791/2025 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T., IA No. 55789/2025 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES, IA No.55787/2025 - PERMISSION TO FILE LENGTHY LIST OF DATES) Date : 18-07-2025 This matter was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA KANT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JOYMALYA BAGCHI For Petitioner(s) :Mr. Trideep Pais, Sr. Adv. Ms. Sanya Kumar, Adv. Ms. Saloni Ambastha, Adv. Mr. Harsh Jain, Adv. Ms. Sakshi Jain, Adv. Ms. Ankita Gupta, AOR For Respondent(s) :Mr. Aniruddha Deshmukh, Adv. Mr. Siddharth Dharmadhikari, Adv. Mr. Aaditya Aniruddha Pande, AOR Mr. Shrirang B. Varma, Adv. Mr. Arvind Kumar Sharma, AOR Mr. Raja Thakare, Adv. Mr. Rohit Khare, Adv. Ms. Swarupama Chaturvedi, Adv. Mr. Digvijay Dam, Adv. Mr. Anmol Chandan, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R 1. In purported compliance of our order dated 23.05.2025, an affidavit sworn by one Vimal Kumar Shukla, who is stated to be an 1
Undersecretary in the National Investigating Agency, has been filed. 2. Having gone through the contents of the affidavit, we are wholly satisfied that no effective or tangible step has been taken by the Respondent-authorities for conducting expeditious trials in the matters investigated by the National Investigating Agency. The most fitting step in this regard would, of course, be the establishment of exclusive Special Courts. It goes without saying that such an exercise would essentially require: (i) Creation of posts in the Superior Judicial Service Cadre; (ii) Creation of posts of requisite ministerial staff, which are indispensable for a fully-functioning Court; and (iii) The bare infrastructure for housing such a premises: including a suitable Court room and other basic amenities. 3. It is an admitted position that none of such steps have been taken by the Respondent-authorities. Contrarily, we observe at an attempt is being made to create an erroneous equivalency between an exclusive Special Court and a designated Court. In our considered opinion, the designation of an existing Court as a “Special Court” under Section 11 of the National Investigation Agency Act, 2008 (in short, the “NIA Act”) would not be sufficient compliance of what has been observed by us in our previous order. 4. We, therefore, outrightly reject such a plea being taken on behalf of the Respondent-authorities. Designation of an existing Court and/or entrustment of exclusive trials under the NIA Act to such designated Courts would incontrovertibly be at the cost of other Court cases including hundreds of under-trials who are 2
languishing in jail, senior citizens, marginalized persons etc. 5. If the Respondent-authorities fail to establish the aforementioned exclusive Special Courts with the pre-requisite infrastructure for the purpose of conducting time-bound or expeditious trials under the NIA Act, the Courts would invariably be left with no alterative than to release the under-trials on bail. After all, for how long can such individuals be kept in indefinite custody when no effective mechanism exists to ensure the timely conclusion of their trials? 6. Adverting to the case in hand, we deem it appropriate to modify paragraph 2 of our order dated 17.03.2025, making it clear that if the Union of India and the respondent-State fail to establish exclusive Special Courts forthwith, the prayer of the petitioner for release on bail shall be considered on merits on the next date of hearing. 7. Post the matter on 04.09.2025. 8. It is clarified that this will be the last opportunity to the Union of India and the respondent-State to take a final decision in terms of the observations made hereinabove. (ARJUN BISHT) (PREETHI T.C.) ASTT. REGISTRAR-cum-PS ASSISTANT REGISTRAR 3
1 ITEM NO.18 COURT NO.2 SECTION II-A S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s).4276/2025 [Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 05-03-2024 in CRLA No.1249/2023 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay] KAILASH RAMCHANDANI Petitioner(s) VERSUS STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ANR. Respondent(s) IA No. 55791/2025 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. IA No. 55789/2025 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES IA No. 55787/2025 - PERMISSION TO FILE LENGTHY LIST OF DATES Date : 23-05-2025 This matter was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA KANT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NONGMEIKAPAM KOTISWAR SINGH For Petitioner(s) Mr. Trideep Pais, Sr. Adv. Ms. Sanya Kumar, Adv. Ms. Saloni Ambastha, Adv. Mr. Harsh Jain, Adv. Mr. Ved P. Singh, Adv. Ms. Ankita Gupta, AOR For Respondent(s) Mr. Raja Thakare, ASG Mr. Rohit Khare, Adv. Ms. Swarupama Chaturvedi, Adv. Mr. Digvijay Dam, Adv. Mr. Anmol Chandan, Adv. Mr. Arvind Kumar Sharma, Adv. Mr. Aniruddha Deshmukh, Adv. Mr. Siddharth Dharmadhikari, Adv. Mr. Aaditya Aniruddha Pande, AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R 1. This case is not an exception as there are hundreds of trials in different parts of the country under the Special Statutes like UAPA, Indian Explosives Act, MCOCA and other similar statutes
2 in different States. The cases which are entrusted to the National Investigation Agency also primarily relate to heinous crimes having pan-India ramifications with serious consequences. It is oftenly openly seen that every case contains a list of hundreds of witnesses proposed to be examined. However, the trials are not commencing because the Presiding Officers are also occupied with several other criminal and civil cases. In the absence of a judicial audit of the matters, which are actually or likely to be generated with the enactment of a new law, the trials pertaining to heinous offences, have brought an enormous burden on the existing sytem. In a situation where the under-trial is languishing in jail for years on one hand and on the other, the trial is yet to commence, there is a dilemma before the courts. The release or denial on bail is indirectly a breach of Article 21 of the Constitution. 2. The most effective recourse can be the establishment of dedicated courts to whom the trials under the special statutes can be entrusted, without giving them any other civil or criminal cases. Ideally, the trial should take place on a day-to-day basis. Creation of additional courts, along with requisite infrastructure, is the domain of the Executive and also a part of their policy decision, which can be taken in consultation with the Chief Justice of the High Court, after securing complete data regarding pendency of the trials in the State. 3. Learned Additional Solicitor General of India seeks and is granted four weeks’ time to have categorical instructions in this regard. 4. Post the matter for hearing on 18.07.2025. (SATISH KUMAR YADAV) (PREETHI T.C.) ADDITIONAL REGISTRAR ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
ITEM NO.1 COURT NO.3 SECTION II-A S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s).4276/2025 [Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 05-03-2024 in CRLA No.1249/2023 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay] KAILASH RAMCHANDANI Petitioner(s) VERSUS STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ANR. Respondent(s) (IA No. 55791/2025 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T., IA No. 55789/2025 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES, IA No.55787/2025 - PERMISSION TO FILE LENGTHY LIST OF DATES) Date : 09-05-2025 This matter was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA KANT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NONGMEIKAPAM KOTISWAR SINGH For Petitioner(s) :Mr. Trideep Pais, Sr. Adv. Ms. Sanya Kumar, Adv. Ms. Saloni Ambastha, Adv. Mr. Harsh Jain, Adv. Mr. Ved P. Singh, Adv. Ms. Ankita Gupta, AOR For Respondent(s) :Mr. Aniruddha Deshmukh, Adv. Mr. Siddharth Dharmadhikari, Adv. Mr. Aaditya Aniruddha Pande, AOR Mr. Rajkumar Bhaskar Thakre, ASG Mr. Rohit Khare, Adv. Ms. Swarupma Chaturvedi, Adv. Mr. Digvijay Dan, Adv. Ms. Anmol Chandan, Adv. Mr. Arvind Kumar Sharma, AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R 1. Learned Additional Solicitor General of India has referred to the affidavit filed by respondent no.2 - National Investigation Agency. We are, however, of the view that when trials are to take 1
place under Special Laws, it is imperative on the Union or States to establish specialized Courts with adequate infrastructure for ensuring speedy trial, for achieving the legislative object of the statute. 2. Shri Rajkumar Bhaskar Thakre, learned ASG seeks and is granted two weeks’ time to have instructions in this regard. 3. Post the matter on 23.05.2025. (ARJUN BISHT) (PREETHI T.C.) ASTT. REGISTRAR-cum-PS ASSISTANT REGISTRAR 2
1 ITEM NO.3 COURT NO.3 SECTION II-A S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s).4276/2025 [Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 05-03-2024 in CRLA No.1249/2023 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay] KAILASH RAMCHANDANI Petitioner(s) VERSUS STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ANR. Respondent(s) IA No. 55791/2025 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. IA No. 55789/2025 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES IA No. 55787/2025 - PERMISSION TO FILE LENGTHY LIST OF DATES Date : 28-04-2025 This matter was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA KANT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NONGMEIKAPAM KOTISWAR SINGH For Petitioner(s) Mr. Trideep Pais, Sr. Adv. Ms. Sanya Kumar, Adv. Ms. Saloni Ambastha, Adv. Mr. Harsh Jain, Adv. Mr. Ved P. Singh, Adv. Ms. Ankita Gupta, AOR For Respondent(s) Mr. Rajkumar Bhaskar Thakre, ASG Mr. Rohit Khare, Adv. Ms. Swarupma Chaturvedi, Adv. Mr. Digvijay Dan, Adv. Ms. Anmol Chandan, Adv. Mr. Arvind Kumar Sharma, Adv. Mr. Aniruddha Deshmukh, Adv. Mr. Siddharth Dharmadhikari, Adv. Mr. Aaditya Aniruddha Pande, AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R 1. Learned Additional Solicitor General of India representing the National Investigation Agency (respondent No.2 herein) seeks and is granted ten days’ time to file a Status Report with regard to compliance of order dated 17.03.2025.
2 2. The Status Report shall also address the issue of setting up of some Special Courts for speedy conclusion of trial for the offences registered under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) and the Maharashtra Control of Organized Crime Act, 1999 (MCOCA). 3. Post the matter for hearing on 09.05.2025. (SATISH KUMAR YADAV) (PREETHI T.C.) ADDITIONAL REGISTRAR ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
1 ITEM NO.6 COURT NO.3 SECTION II-C S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s).1422/2025 [Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 13-11-2024 in BA No.4110/2024 passed by the High Court of Delhi at New Delhi] MAHESH KHATRI @ BHOLI Petitioner(s) VERSUS STATE NCT OF DELHI Respondent(s) FOR ADMISSION IA No. 25948/2025 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES Date : 24-04-2025 This matter was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA KANT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NONGMEIKAPAM KOTISWAR SINGH For Petitioner(s) Ms. Joshini Tuli, Adv. Mr. Ishan Kapoor, Adv. Mr. Joginder Tuli, Adv. Mr. Lalit Khanna, Adv. Mrs. Gargi Khanna, AOR For Respondent(s) Mr. S.D. Sanjay, A.S.G. Mr. Mukesh Kumar Maroria, AOR Mr. Udai Khanna, Adv. Mr. Piyush Beriwal, Adv. Mr. Raman Yadav, Adv. Ms. Sweksha, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R 1. Learned Additional Solicitor General of India submits that in deference to orders dated 03.02.2025 and 19.03.2025, a proposal is being moved, which is right now under the active consideration of the concerned higher authorities. He submits that given three weeks’ time, an effective proposal shall be placed on record. 2. Post the matter for hearing on 24.07.2025.
2 3. Meanwhile, para 19 of the impugned order dated 13.11.2024, passed by the High Court of Delhi, imposing cost of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) on the counsel, is set aside. (SATISH KUMAR YADAV) (PREETHI T.C.) ADDITIONAL REGISTRAR ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
ITEM NO.4 COURT NO.3 SECTION II-C S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s).1422/2025 [Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 13-11-2024 in BA No.4110/2024 passed by the High Court of Delhi at New Delhi] MAHESH KHATRI @ BHOLI Petitioner(s) VERSUS STATE NCT OF DELHI Respondent(s) (IA No.25948/2025 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES) Date : 19-03-2025 This matter was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA KANT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NONGMEIKAPAM KOTISWAR SINGH For Petitioner(s) :Mr. Ishan Kapoor, Adv. Ms. Joshini Tuli, Adv. Mr. Joginder Tuli, Adv. Mrs. Gargi Khanna, AOR Mr. Akshay Kumar, Adv. For Respondent(s) :Mr. S. D. Sanjay, A.S.G. Mr. Mukesh Kumar Maroria, AOR Mr. Udai Khanna, Adv. Mr. Piyush Beriwal, Adv. Mr. Raman Yadav, Adv. Ms. Sweksha, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R 1. Learned Additional Solicitor General of India seeks and is granted two weeks’ time to have categorical instructions for completion of trial in a time-bound manner. 2. We may hasten to observe that in such like cases where the undertrial, owing to their past antecedents, cannot be released on bail in the larger interest of the society, it is imperative upon the Authorities to evolve a mechanism to provide a speedy and time- 1
bound trial. One of the effective recourses could be to establish Special Courts to conclue the trials on day-to-day basis. A clear mandate can be fixed for such Courts that regardless of the attempts, if any, made by the defence counsel to prolong the trial, the Court will proceed with it and conclude the same within the prescribed timeline. 3. Let the learned ASG have comprehensive instructions in light of the observations made hereinabove. 4. Post the matter on 24.04.2025. (ARJUN BISHT) (PREETHI T.C.) ASTT. REGISTRAR-cum-PS ASSISTANT REGISTRAR 2
1 ITEM NO.8 COURT NO.3 SECTION II-A S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRIMINAL) ………………..Diary No(s).10033/2025 [Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 05-03-2024 in CRLA No.1249/2023 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay] KAILASH RAMCHANDANI Petitioner(s) VERSUS STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ANR. Respondent(s) (IA No. 55782/2025 - CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING IA No. 55791/2025 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. IA No. 55789/2025 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES IA No. 55787/2025 - PERMISSION TO FILE LENGTHY LIST OF DATES) Date : 17-03-2025 This matter was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA KANT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NONGMEIKAPAM KOTISWAR SINGH For Petitioner(s) Mr. Trideep Pais, Sr. Adv. Ms. Sanya Kumar, Adv. Ms. Saloni Ambasstha, Adv. Mr. Harsh Jain, Adv. Mr. Ved P. Singh, Adv. Ms. Ankita Gupta, AOR For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R 1. Delay condoned. 2. While we are not inclined to release the petitioner on bail at this stage, we are equally concerned with the inordinate delay in conclusion of trial. 3. Issue notice as to why the investigation and trial is not being conducted in a time-bound manner, and if the Investigating Agency is not in a position to do so, why the petitioner’s prayer for bail not be considered.
2 4. Notice be made returnable on 28.04.2025. 5. Dasti, in addition, is permitted. (SATISH KUMAR YADAV) (PREETHI T.C.) ADDITIONAL REGISTRAR ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
ITEM NO.7 COURT NO.3 SECTION II-C S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s).1422/2025 [Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 13-11-2024 in BA No. 4110/2024 passed by the High Court of Delhi at New Delhi] MAHESH KHATRI @ BHOLI Petitioner(s) VERSUS STATE NCT OF DELHI Respondent(s) (IA No.25948/2025 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES) Date : 03-02-2025 This matter was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA KANT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NONGMEIKAPAM KOTISWAR SINGH For Petitioner(s) :Mr. Ishan Kapoor, Adv. Ms. Joshini Tuli, Adv. Mr. Joginder Tuli, Adv. Mr. Shrikant Sharma, Adv. Mrs. Gargi Khanna, AOR For Respondent(s) : UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R 1. The custody certificate dated 16.11.2024, certified by the Office of the Superintendent, Tihar Jail, New Delhi vividly demonstrates that the petitioner in the present case is a hardened criminal, who has more than a dozen criminal antecedents, right from 2013 onwards. The allegations in these FIRs registered against the petitioner pertain to a variety of heinous offences. At this juncture, it is relevant to note that the certificate further 1
reveals that he has been granted bail in most, if not all, of the cases. 2. It is imminently obvious to us that the instant petitioner has repeatedly misused the concession of bail in utter disregard and brazen defiance of the conditions that necessarily flow out of such a release order. 3. That being so, what appears to be even more concerning is that according to learned counsel for the petitioner, the trial even with reference to the FIR No.314/2013 under Sections 356, 379, 411 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 at Police Station Prashant Vihar, namely, the oldest case as per the record, is still pending. 4. It goes without saying that endless protracted trials do violate the incarcerated person’s right to a speedy trial, even if he is found not entitled to the relief of bail. Unnecessary delays in criminal trials, such as the unexplained delay of 12 years in the aforementioned FIR of 2013, strike at the very heart of the constitutional values that flow out of Article 21 of the Constitution of India. 5. The prosecution, thus, must show-cause as to what has prevented it from concluding the trial in at least 15 matters referred to the pending against the petitioner, as per the custody certificate. 6. Accordingly, while we are not inclined to release the petitioner on bail, let notice be issued for the aforesaid limited purpose, returnable on 19.03.2025. 7. We also direct the Respondent-State to file a status report before the next date of hearing, with respect to the trials pending 2
against the petitioner, as per the custody certificate. (ARJUN BISHT) (PREETHI T.C.) ASTT. REGISTRAR-cum-PS ASSISTANT REGISTRAR 3