KATTA SUBRAMANYAM v. A. ALAM PASHA

1 ITEM NO.1704 COURT NO.3 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 Criminal Appeal No(s). 457/2018 MANJU SURANA Appellant(s) VERSUS RATAN SINGH & ORS. Respondent(s) IA No. 204721/2025 is to be listed IA No. 204721/2025 - DISCHARGE OF ADVOCATE ON RECORD WITH SLP(Crl) No. 18070-18072/2025 (II-C) IA No. 271101/2025 - CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING IA No. 271103/2025 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. Date : 21-11-2025 These matters were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ATUL S. CHANDURKAR [IN CHAMBER] For Appellant(s) : Mr. Vairawan A.s, AOR Mr. Prashant Bhushan, AOR For Respondent(s) :Mr. Merusagar Samantaray, AOR Mr. Gautam Jha, AOR Mr. Nishant Ramakantrao Katneshwarkar, AOR Ms. Radhika Gupta , AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R I.A. No. 204721/2025 in Criminal Appeal No. 457/2018 1. Perused the application and heard learned counsel for the respondent No.8. 2. Considering the reasons stated in the application, the Interlocutory Application seeking discharge of Advocate-on-Record for respondent No.8 is allowed. 3. The Interim Application is disposed of.

2 SLP(Crl) No. 18070-18072/2025 1. At the request of the learned counsel for the appellant, time of three weeks’ is granted to supply spare copies. 2. If the spare copies are supplied, issue notice to the concerned respondents, returnable in four weeks. (LOKESH ARORA) (MANOJ KUMAR-II) SENIOR PERSONAL ASSISTANT COURT MASTER (NSH)

ITEM NO.37 COURT NO.13 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 SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRIMINAL) Diary No. 58074/2025 [Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 01-08-2024 in CRLRC(MD) No. 475/2024 01-08-2024 in CRLRC(MD) No. 516/2024 01- 08-2024 in CRLOP(MD) No. 18418/2024 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Madras at Madurai] R SIVARAMAN Petitioner(s) VERSUS S MATHIYALAGAN & ORS. Respondent(s) IA No. 271101/2025 - CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING and IA No. 271103/2025 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. Date : 07-11-2025 This matter was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Vairawan A.s, AOR For Respondent(s) : UPON hearing the counsel, the Court made the following O R D E R Application for exemption from filing an official translation of the impugned judgment and order is allowed. Delay condoned. Issue notice and tag with Criminal Appeal No. 457/2018, titled “Manju Surana Vs. Ratan Singh and Ors.”. Service shall be effected by all modes, including dasti. (BABITA PANDEY) (PREETI SAXENA) AR-cum-PS COURT MASTER (NSH)

ITEM NO.8 REGISTRAR COURT. 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 BEFORE THE REGISTRAR MS. SUJATA SINGH Criminal Appeal No(s). 457/2018 MANJU SURANA Appellant(s) VERSUS RATAN SINGH & ORS. Respondent(s) Date : 07-10-2025 This appeal was called on for hearing today. For Appellant(s) : Mr. Prashant Bhushan, AOR Mr. Siddharth Mishra, Adv. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Merusagar Samantaray, AOR Mr. Gautam Jha, AOR Mr. Nishant Ramakantrao Katneshwarkar, AOR Ms. Radhika Gupta, AOR Mr. Saket Verma, Adv. Mr. Siddhant Kaushik, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Respondent no.1 has been deleted from the array of parties vide order dt.27.03.2018. Respondent nos. 2, 3, 5 are duly represented. Service is complete on respondent nos. 4 and 7 but none has entered appearance. Contd….

-2- Ld. Counsel for the appellant has filed proof of publication with regard to service on respondent no.6 but the same is defective. Defects be cured within four weeks. Scanned soft copies of High Court and Trial Court records have already been received and copy of the same has been provided to the ld. Counsels for the parties. Ld. Counsel for respondent no. 8 has filed an application seeking discharge. Let the said application be listed before the Hon’ble Judge in Chambers for further directions. SUJATA SINGH Registrar HJ

ITEM NO.6 REGISTRAR COURT. 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 BEFORE THE REGISTRAR MS. SUJATA SINGH Criminal Appeal No(s). 457/2018 MANJU SURANA Appellant(s) VERSUS RATAN SINGH & ORS. Respondent(s) Date : 21-08-2025 This appeal was called on for hearing today. For Appellant(s) : Mr. Prashant Bhushan, AOR For Respondent(s) : Mr. Merusagar Samantaray, AOR Mr. Gautam Jha, AOR Mr. Nishant Ramakantrao Katneshwarkar, AOR Ms. Radhika Gupta , AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Respondent no.1 has been deleted from the array of parties vide order dt. 27.03.2018. Respondent nos. 2, 3 and 5 are duly represented. Service is complete on respondent nos. 4 and 7 but none has entered appearance. Respondent no. 8 is duly represented. Ld. Counsel for the said respondent has not filed any application seeking discharge as was submitted on last date of hearing. Today more time is sought. Two weeks time is granted as last opportunity. Contd….

-2- Ld. Counsel for the appellant is granted four weeks time as last opportunity to file proof of publication in respect of respondent no.6. As per office report, scanned soft copies of High Court and Trial Court records have been received and soft copies of the same have been provided through e-mail to Ld. Counsels for both the parties in light of Circular dt.10.01.2025. List again on 07.10.2025. SUJATA SINGH Registrar HJ

1 REVISED * Only for appearance ITEM NO.45 COURT NO.5 SECTION II 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). 2824- 2825/2024 [Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 21-10-2022 in CRLP No. 258/2021 17-03-2023 in IA No. 1/2023 passed by the High Court for The State of Telangana at Hyderabad] V.D. RAJAGOPAL Petitioner(s) VERSUS THE STATE OF TELANGANA Respondent(s) Date : 12-08-2025 These petitions were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M. SUNDRESH HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NONGMEIKAPAM KOTISWAR SINGH For Petitioner(s) Mr. S. Nagamuthu, Sr. Adv. Mr. Mayank Jain, Adv. Dr. Sushil Kumar Gupta, Adv. Mrs. Sunita Gupta, Adv. Mr. Manan Verma, AOR Ms. Ipshita Gupta, Adv. Mr. Sumit Kumar, Adv. Mr. Shubham Arora, Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Vikramjeet Banerjee, A.S.G. Mr. Arijit Prasad, Sr. Adv. Mr. Mukesh Kumar Maroria, AOR Ms. Shraddha Deshmukh, Adv. Mr. Raghav Sharma, Adv. Mr. Shantnu Sharma, Adv. Mr. V V V Pattabhi Ram, Adv. Mr. Vivek Gupta, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R We have been informed by the learned Additional Solicitor General that a similar issue is pending

2 before a Larger Bench of this Court and prayers have been made in SLP [Crl.] No.520/2021. In view of the same, we grant leave and direct these matters to be tagged along with SLP [Crl.] No.520/2021 which, in turn, is directed to be tagged with the matter pending before the Larger Bench. In the meantime, there shall be an order of stay on the trial qua the appellant. (ASHA SUNDRIYAL) (POONAM VAID) DEPUTY REGISTRAR ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

3 ITEM NO.45 COURT NO.5 SECTION II 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). 2824- 2825/2024 [Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 21-10-2022 in CRLP No. 258/2021 17-03-2023 in IA No. 1/2023 passed by the High Court for The State of Telangana at Hyderabad] V.D. RAJAGOPAL Petitioner(s) VERSUS THE STATE OF TELANGANA Respondent(s) Date : 12-08-2025 These petitions were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M. SUNDRESH HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NONGMEIKAPAM KOTISWAR SINGH For Petitioner(s) Mr. S. Nagamuthu, Sr. Adv. Dr. Sushil Kumar Gupta, Adv. Mrs. Sunita Gupta, Adv. Mr. Manan Verma, AOR Ms. Ipshita Gupta, Adv. Mr. Sumit Kumar, Adv. Mr. Shubham Arora, Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Vikramjeet Banerjee, A.S.G. Mr. Arijit Prasad, Sr. Adv. Mr. Mukesh Kumar Maroria, AOR Ms. Shraddha Deshmukh, Adv. Mr. Raghav Sharma, Adv. Mr. Shantnu Sharma, Adv. Mr. V V V Pattabhi Ram, Adv. Mr. Vivek Gupta, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R We have been informed by the learned Additional Solicitor General that a similar issue is pending before a Larger Bench of this Court and prayers have

4 been made in SLP [Crl.] No.520/2021. In view of the same, we grant leave and direct these matters to be tagged along with SLP [Crl.] No.520/2021 which, in turn, is directed to be tagged with the matter pending before the Larger Bench. In the meantime, there shall be an order of stay on the trial qua the appellant. (ASHA SUNDRIYAL) (POONAM VAID) DEPUTY REGISTRAR ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

ITEM NO.15 COURT NO.6 SECTION II 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). 2824- 2825/2024 [Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 21-10-2022 in CRLP No. 258/2021 17-03-2023 in IA No. 1/2023 passed by the High Court for The State of Telangana at Hyderabad] V.D. RAJAGOPAL Petitioner(s) VERSUS THE STATE OF TELANGANA Respondent(s) Date : 22-07-2025 These petitions were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M. SUNDRESH HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NONGMEIKAPAM KOTISWAR SINGH For Petitioner(s) Mr. S. Nagamuthu, Sr. Adv. Dr. Sushil Kumar Gupta, Adv. Mrs. Sunita Gupta, Adv. Mr. Manan Verma, AOR Mr. Sumit Kumar, Adv. Mr. Shubham Arora, Adv. Ms. Ipshita Gupta, Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Vikramjeet Banerjee, A.S.G. Mr. Arijit Prasad, Sr. Adv. Mr. Mukesh Kumar Maroria, AOR Ms. Shraddha Deshmukh, Adv. Mr. Raghav Sharma, Adv. Mr. Shantnu Sharma, Adv. Mr. V V V Pattabhi Ram, Adv. Mr. Vivek Gupta, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R List the matters on 12.08.2025 at the end of the Board. (SWETA BALODI) (POONAM VAID) ASTT. REGISTRAR-cum-PS ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

ITEM NO.82 REGISTRAR COURT. 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 BEFORE THE REGISTRAR MS. SUJATA SINGH Criminal Appeal No(s). 457/2018 MANJU SURANA Appellant(s) VERSUS RATAN SINGH & ORS. Respondent(s) Date : 15-07-2025 This appeal was called on for hearing today. For Appellant(s) : Mr Siddharth Mishra, Adv. Mr. Prashant Bhushan, AOR For Respondent(s) : Mr. Merusagar Samantaray, AOR Mr. Gautam Jha, AOR Mr. Nishant Ramakantrao Katneshwarkar, AOR Ms. Radhika Gupta, AOR Mr. Saket Verma, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Respondent no.1 has been deleted from the array of parties vide Hon’ble Court’s order dt.27.03.2018. Respondent nos. 2,3 and 5 are duly represented. Respondent no.8 is duly represented. Ld. Counsel for the respondent no.8 has submitted that an application seeking discharge would be filed as the ld. Counsel has not received any instructions from the said respondent. Be filed within one week. Contd….

2 Service is complete on respondent nos. 4 and 7 but none has entered appearance. Ld. Counsel for the petitioner has filed an application seeking service through paper publication on respondent no.6. Application is hereby allowed. Proof of publication be filed within four weeks of such publication. List again on 21.08.2025. SUJATA SINGH Registrar HJ

ITEM NO.44 COURT NO.14 SECTION II-B 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.6517/2025 [Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 11-04-2025 in CRLMC No.8044/2018 passed by the High Court of Kerala at Ernakulam] K.M. ABRAHAM Petitioner VERSUS JOMON PUTHENPURACKAL & ORS. Respondents Date : 30-04-2025 This petition was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DIPANKAR DATTA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN For Petitioner(s) :Mr. R Basant, Sr. Adv. Mr. G. Prakash, AOR Mr. S. Chandrasekharan Nair, Adv. Mrs. Beena Prakash, Adv. Mr. Jishnu M. L., Adv. Ms. Priyanka Prakash, Adv. Mr. Raunak Arora, Adv. Mr. Anoop R, Adv. For Respondent(s) :Mr. Abhilash M R, Adv. Mr. Arivazhagan, Adv. Mr. Sandeep Singh, Adv. M/S. M R Law Associates, AOR Mr. Jaideep Gupta, Sr. Adv. Mr. C. K. Sasi, AOR Ms. Meena K. Poulose, Adv. Ms. Racheeta Chawla, Adv. Ms. Sampriti Baksi, Adv. Mr. Siddharath Banerjee, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R 1. Mr. R Basant, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner, while 1

referring to the decisions of coordinate Benches of this Court in Anil Kumar & Ors. v. M.K. Aiyappa @ Anr. 1 and L. Narayana Swamy V. State of Karnataka & Anr. 2 submits that without sanction, the Magistrate could not have directed registration of an FIR (exercising power under Section 156 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973) for alleged commission of offence by the petitioner under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 3 . 2. In his usual fairness, Mr. Basant has also referred us to the decisions of this Court in Manju Surana v. Sunil Arora & Ors. 4 , B.S. Yeddiyurappa V. A Alam Pasha & Ors. 5 and Shamin Khan v. Debashish Chakrabarty & Ors. 6 . He submits that a co-ordinate Bench in Manju Surana (supra) has referred the issue to a larger Bench. Noticing such decision, other co-ordinate Benches in Shamin Khan (supra) and B.S. Yeddiyurappa (supra) have also directed tagging of the respective proceedings with the file of Manju Surana (supra) . 3. Since the law laid down in Anil Kumar (supra) and L. Narayana Swamy (supra) have not yet been reversed, the same continues to be valid and operative. 4. In such view of the matter, we issue notice and grant stay of FIR No.RC0332025A0004 dated 25 th April, 2025 registered at Police Station ACB Cochin, District Cochin, Kerala under Sections 13(2) r/w 13(1)(e) of the PC Act in terms of the order of the High Court under challenge in this special leave petition, till the next date of hearing. 5. Mr. Jaideep Gupta, learned senior counsel with Mr. C.K. Sasi, learned 1 (2013) 10 SCC 705 2 (2016) 9 SCC 598 3 PC Act 4 (2018) 5 SCC 557 5 SLP (Crl.) No.520/2021 6 SLP (Crl.) No.3567-3568/2017 2

advocate-on-record, on caveat, has entered appearance on behalf of the State of Kerala. 6. Mr. Abhilash M. R., learned counsel accepts notice on behalf of the respondent no.1-complainant. 7. Service of formal notice on the respondent no.1-complainant and the respondents 2 & 3 stand dispensed with. 8. Issue notice to the respondent no.4. 9. Tag this special leave petition with Criminal Appeal No.457/2018. (RASHMI DHYANI PANT) (SUDHIR KUMAR SHARMA) ASST. REGISTRAR-CUM-PS COURT MASTER (NSH) 3

1 ITEM NO.7 COURT NO.8 SECTION II 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). 2824- 2825/2024 [Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 21-10-2022 in CRLP No. 258/2021 and order dated 17-03-2023 in IA No. 1/2023 passed by the High Court for The State of Telangana at Hyderabad] V.D. RAJAGOPAL Petitioner(s) VERSUS THE STATE OF TELANGANA Respondent(s) FOR FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING ON IA 157096/2023 FOR EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT ON IA 157097/2023 IA No. 157096/2023 - CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING IA No. 157097/2023 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT Date : 23-04-2025 This matter was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M. SUNDRESH HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL For Petitioner(s) Mr. S. Nagamuthu, Sr. Adv. Dr. Sushil Kumar Gupta, Adv. Mrs. Sunita Gupta, Adv. Mr. Manan Verma, AOR Ms. Ipshita Gupta, Adv. Mr. Sumit Kumar, Adv. Mr. Shubham Arora, Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Arijit Prasad, Sr. Adv. Mr. Mukesh Kumar Maroria, AOR Ms. Shraddha Deshmukh, Adv. Ms. Aakanksha Kaul, Adv. Mr. Raghav Sharma, Adv. Mr. Shantnu Sharma, Adv. Mr. V V V Pattabhi Ram, Adv. Mr. Vivek Gupta, Adv.

2 UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R List the matters after two weeks. (ASHA SUNDRIYAL) (POONAM VAID) DEPUTY REGISTRAR ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

1 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA EXTRAORDINARY APPELLATE JURISDICTION SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (Crl.) No.520/2021 B.S YEDDIYURAPPA Petitioner(s) VERSUS A ALAM PASHA & ORS. Respondent(s) WITH SLP(Crl) No. 758/2021 SLP(Crl) No. 2318/2021 SLP(Crl) No. 2753/2021 SLP(Crl) No. 3372/2021 SLP(Crl) No. 9361/2021 SLP(Crl) No. 8675/2022 SLP(Crl) No. 5333-5347/2016 O R D E R 1. We heard these matters at length across several dates and concluded the hearing on 04.04.2025 framing, inter alia , the following questions for our consideration: I. What are the relevant considerations as contemplated by Section 17A of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (for short, “the PC Act”) which the appropriate authority or government is expected to look into before the grant of approval for initiation of any enquiry, inquiry, or investigation by the police? II. Whether the considerations which weigh with the appropriate authority or government while granting approval under Section 17A of the PC Act are fundamentally so different from the one that a Magistrate is ordinarily expected to apply while passing an order under Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short, “the Cr.P.C.”) so as to preclude the Magistrate from fulfilling the object underlying Section 17A of the PC Act? In other words, whether the considerations under Section 17A of the PC Act are of such a nature that they are necessarily beyond the ambit or scope of consideration by a Magistrate while directing an investigation

2 under Section 156(3) of the Cr.P.C.? III. As a natural corollary of the aforesaid, could it be said that once a Magistrate has applied his mind under Section 156(3) of the Cr.P.C., the requirement of a prior approval under Section 17A of the PC Act is meaningless, redundant and no longer necessary? Could it be said that a police officer, despite a direction under Section 156(3) by a Magistrate, would remain inhibited from conducting any enquiry, inquiry, or investigation without prior approval as required by Section 17A? If yes, how does the standard of application of mind by the appropriate authority differ from that of the Magistrate? IV. In case of a private complaint, whether Section 19 of the PC Act, more particularly parts (i) and (ii) of the First Proviso therein contemplates that sanction would be required only after the Magistrate first completes the stage of examining the complainant and / or causing a magisterial inquiry wherever necessary in terms of Section(s) 200 and 202 of the Cr.P.C. respectively? In other words, whether the three conditions envisaged under the First Proviso, namely that a complaint has been filed as per Part (i) and that the court has not only not dismissed such complaint but also explicitly directed the obtainment of sanction as per Part (ii), necessarily implies that it is open for the Magistrate to proceed in terms of Chapter XV more particularly under Section(s) 200, 202 and 203 even without the grant of sanction under Section 19 of the PC Act? If so, whether such an interpretation is limited only for the purpose of “cognizance” under Section 19 of the PC Act? V. Whether, Part (ii) of the First Proviso to Section 19 of the PC Act, more particularly the expression “the court has not dismissed the complaint under section 203” necessarily envisages that the Magistrate ought to have first considered the statements of the complainant and the witnesses(s) and / or of any magisterial inquiry in terms of Section(s) 200 and 202 of the Cr.P.C.? In other words, could it be said that the Magistrate takes cognizance only after

3 deciding not to dismiss the complaint under Section 203 especially in light of the decision in Legal Remembrancer v. Abani Kumar Banerji, reported in 1950 SCC OnLine Cal 49, which observed thus: “9. I have for myself no hesitation in feeling that there is nothing which would justify our referring the matter to the Full Bench. As I read s. 190 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and the subsequent sections, it seems to me to be clear that a magistrate is not bound to take cognizance of an offence, merely because a petition of complaint is filed before him. Mr. Mukherji's argument is that a magistrate cannot possibly take any action with regard to a petition of complaint, without applying his mind to it, and taking cognizance of the offence mentioned in the complaint necessarily takes place, when the magistrate's mind is applied to the petition. Consequently Mr. Mukherji argues, whenever a magistrate takes the action, say, of issuing search warrant or asking the police to enquire and to investigate, he has taken cognizance of the case. In my judgment, this is putting a wrong connotation on the words “taking cognizance”. What is “taking cognizance” has not been defined in the Code of Criminal Procedure, and I have no desire now to attempt to define it. It seems to me clear, however, that before it can be said that any magistrate has taken cognizance of any offence under s. 190(1)(a) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, he must not only have applied his mind to the contents of the petition, but he must have done so for the purpose of proceeding in a particular way as indicated in the subsequent provisions of this Chapter,—proceeding under s. 200, and thereafter sending it for enquiry and report under s. 202. When the magistrate applies his mind not for the purpose of proceeding under the subsequent sections of this Chapter, but for taking action of some other kind, e.g., ordering investigation under s. 156(3), or issuing a search warrant for the purpose of the investigation, he cannot be said to have taken cognizance of the offence. My conclusion, therefore, is that the learned magistrate is wrong in thinking that the Chief Presidency Magistrate was bound to

4 take cognizance of the case as soon as the petition of complaint was filed.” (Emphasis supplied) VI. Whether it could be said that the First Proviso to Section 19 of the PC Act is detached from the substantive part contained in sub-section (1) of the said provision? VII. Whether the requirements introduced by Section 17A and the amended Section 19 of the PC Act could be said to be retrospectively applicable? Since the aforesaid procedural changes were brought in tandem with the substantive changes in the very offences itself as provided under Section(s) 7, 11, 13 and 15 respectively of the PC Act by way of the 2018 Amendment Act, whether the same necessarily implies that the introduction of Section 17A as-well as the amendment of Section 19 were not merely procedural but also substantive in nature, and thus, only ought to be applicable prospectively? In other words, whether the conspectus of amendments to the PC Act, i.e., Section(s) 7, 11, 13, 15, 17A and 19 respectively is so intrinsically intertwined with each other in such a manner that they can neither survive without each other nor can they be read in isolation from one another and thus can only be regarded as nothing but substantive in nature? Notwithstanding the fact that the changes brought about by Section 17A and the amended Section 19 of the PC Act are substantive in nature and not merely procedural, could it be said that the said provisions would nevertheless have a retrospective effect by virtue of the said provisions either being clarificatory and explanatory in nature or having the effect of providing certain safeguards and benefits to the accused persons under the PC Act that ought to enure to the benefit of an accused retrospectively?” 2. The context in which the aforesaid issues arise would be clear from what is narrated below. 3. On 26.04.2012, the first respondent filed a complaint

5 against the petitioner and others (who were Government Servants) alleging commission of offences, inter alia, punishable under section 13 (1)(c) read with section 13 (2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 1 . 4. At the time of commission of the alleged offences, the petitioner was Chief Minister, Karnataka, which office he held from 30.05.2008 to 31.07.2011. By an order dated 21.05.2012, passed under section 156 (3) of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 2 , the complaint was referred to Lokayukta police for investigation. Pursuant thereto, FIR was registered alleging commission of offences under the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short IPC) and the PC Act. 5. Pursuant to the investigation, a final report was submitted, and cognizance was taken on 24.06.2013. Aggrieved therewith, the petitioner invoked the jurisdiction of the High Court under section 482 of the CrPC for quashing the aforementioned FIR and consequential proceedings by placing reliance on a decision of this Court in “ Anil Kumar vs. M.K. Aiyappa 3 ”, wherein it was held that “once it was noticed that there was no previous sanction, the 1 PC Act 2 CrPC 3 (2013) 10 SCC 705

6 Magistrate cannot order investigation against the public servant while invoking powers under section 156 (3) of CrPC”. 6. The High Court by its order dated 11.10.2013 allowed the 482 CrPC petition and quashed the FIR as well as the subsequent proceedings in absence of sanction by relying upon the decision of this Court in Aiyappa (supra). 7. The order dated 11.10.2013 attained finality. However, on 12.12.2013, the first respondent filed another complaint making almost identical allegations by adding that the accused have ceased to hold office therefore sanction to prosecute them under section 19 of the PC Act is not required. 8. On 26.08.2016, the trial court dismissed the second complaint, inter alia, on the ground that there was no sanction. 9. Aggrieved by dismissal of the second complaint, the first respondent filed a 482 petition before the High Court, which came to be allowed by the impugned order dated 05.01.2021. 10. While allowing the 482 petition the High Court, inter alia, directed that the PCR No.32/2014 shall stand restored to the file and shall proceed against the accused, except accused no.3 in respect of whom the sanction was denied, in accordance with law.

7 11. Aggrieved by the aforesaid order of the High Court, this petition has been filed. Briefly put, submissions on behalf of petitioner, inter alia, are: (a) second complaint is not maintainable; (b) sanction is required in view of amended Section 19 and newly inserted Section 17-A of the PC Act; (c) Aiyappa’s (supra) judgment is a good law unless set aside by a larger Bench where the reference is pending, therefore, High Court was not justified in interfering with the order rejecting the complaint. 12. Elaborating upon the aforesaid submissions, on behalf of the petitioner it was argued that the allegations in the complaint if are taken at their face value would relate to a decision taken by a public servant in discharge of his official functions or duties and therefore, the bar on investigation as put by section 17 A of the PC Act, inserted by Act 16 of 2018, with effect from 26.07.2018, would apply even if we assume that while passing order under Section 156(3) the Magistrate does not take cognizance. But so long Aiyyapa’s judgment stands, bar of section 19 of PC Act as well as section 197 of CrPC would apply. 13. Elaborating further on the bar of section 19 of the PC Act, it was argued that pursuant to the amendment brought to section 19 by Act 16 of 2018, if the commission of offence relates to the period while

8 such person was in service, the protection of section 19 would be available regardless of his continuance in service. 13. In addition to above, it was argued that insofar as the offences under the IPC are concerned, the requirement of sanction under section 197 of the CrPC is required, even though the accused is no longer in office. 14. It was also argued that on the question as to whether the protection of section 17 A would be available in respect of offences committed prior to the date of its insertion in the statute book, there is a split verdict of this Court, and the matter has been referred to a larger bench in “ Nara Chandrababu Naidu vs. State of Andhra Pradesh and Another 4 ”. 15. Besides above, on behalf of the petitioner, it was argued that though correctness of the decision in Aiyappa’s case has been doubted and referred to a larger bench of this court in “ Manju Surana vs. Sunil Arora & Ors. 5 ”, the decision of the larger bench is yet to come. 16. Per contra, on behalf of the respondents, it was submitted, inter alia, that Aiyappa’s decision is in the teeth of a three-Judge bench decision of this Court in 4 (2024) SCC OnLine SC 47 5 (2018) 5 SCC 557

9 “ R.R. Chari vs. State of Uttar Pradesh 6 ” as also the settled position that while exercising power under section 156 (3) of CrPC, the concerned Magistrate does not take cognizance of the offences, therefore no sanction is required at that stage. 17. Insofar as bar on investigation placed by section 17 A is concerned, the submission on behalf of respondents is two-fold. First, it does not proscribe a court from directing investigation in exercise of its powers under the CrPC; and second, it would not apply to Court directed investigation. 18. With regard to the maintainability of the second complaint, the respondents have relied on a number of decisions to contend that where the first complaint is rejected on technical grounds without touching upon the merits, a second complaint would be maintainable. 19. In the context of the aforesaid submissions, we had reserved the matter for judgment while framing the aforesaid questions for consideration. 20. However, while preparing the judgment, on the issue relating to applicability of Aiyappa’s decision we came across an order of this court dated 16.04.2024 passed by a coordinate bench of this Court in SLP (Crl) Nos.3567-3568/2017 “ Shamin Khan vs. Debashish 6 AIR 1951 SC 207; 1951 SCC Online SC 22

10 Chakrabarty & Ors .”, which reads as under: “Heard learned counsel on both sides. Upon hearing the learned counsel and on perusing the materials on record, we find that the question which was already referred to a larger Bench, as per the judgment in “Manju Surana vs. Sunil Arora & Ors.” (2018) 5 SCC 557, is involved in this case as well. The question referred under the judgment in Manju Surana’s case (supra) is whether, while directing an investigation in terms of provisions under Section 156(3) of the CrPC, the Magistrate is applying his mind. In other words, whether the Magistrate takes ‘cognizance at that stage’. We are of the considered view that scanning of the provisions under Sections 156(3), 173(2), 190, 200, 202, 203 and 204 of the CrPC would, prima facie, reveal that while directing for an investigation and forwarding the complaint therefor, the Magistrate is not actually taking cognizance. However, since the said question is referred as per the above judgment, judicial discipline and propriety dissuade us from proceeding further with the case and hence, we order to tag the captioned matters also along with the matter(s) already referred. Ordered accordingly. The judgment in Manju Surana (supra) would reveal that the matters were referred to larger Bench on 27.3.2018. Considering the fact that question involved is a matter of relevance and such issues arises frequently for consideration before Courts, we are of the considered view that an earlier decision on the question referred is solicited. Registry is directed to place these matters before the Hon’ble the Chief Justice of India for appropriate orders.” (Emphasis supplied) 20. As for maintaining judicial discipline a coordinate bench of this Court has refrained from proceeding further in deciding the underlying issue 7 , which is under reference to a larger bench, we deem it appropriate to tag these petitions with the referred 7 Whether the bar of Section 19 of the PC Act would be applicable on exercise of power under Section 156 (3) of CrPC.

11 matter “Manju Surana vs. Sunil Arora & Ors.” (supra). 21. The registry is directed to place these matters before the Hon’ble Chief Justice of India for appropriate orders. ……………………………………J. [J.B. PARDIWALA] ………………………………………J. [MANOJ MISRA] NEW DELHI; April 21, 2025

1 ITEM NO.1501 COURT NO.13 SECTION II-C (For Orders) S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Petition for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No.520/2021 [Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 05-01-2021 in CRLP No. 9361/2016 passed by the High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru] B.S YEDDIYURAPPA Petitioner(s) VERSUS A ALAM PASHA & ORS. Respondent(s) [ HEARD BY : HON. J.B. PARDIWALA AND HON. MANOJ MISRA, JJ. ] (IA No. 13491/2021 - INTERVENTION APPLICATION & IA No. 13494/2021 - PERMISSION TO APPEAR AND ARGUE IN PERSON) WITH SLP(Crl) No. 758/2021 (II-C) (FOR PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES ON IA 10975/2021) SLP(Crl) No. 2318/2021 (II-C) (FOR PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES ON IA 37664/2021 & FOR EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT ON IA 37670/2021) SLP(Crl) No. 2753/2021 (II-C) (FOR PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES ON IA 46543/2021, FOR EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. ON IA 46546/2021 & FOR APPLICATION FOR MODIFICATION OF PARTY DETAILS / CHALLENGED JUDGMENT DETAILS ON IA 35851/2023) SLP(Crl) No. 3372/2021 (II-C) (FOR EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT ON IA 56807/2021 & FOR EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. ON IA 56808/2021) SLP(Crl) No. 9361/2021 (II-C) (IA No. 51957/2022 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS & IA No.157936/2021 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/ FACTS/ANNEXURES) SLP(Crl) No. 8675/2022 (II-C) (IA No. 138597/2022 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. & IA No. 138595/2022 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/ FACTS/ANNEXURES) SLP(Crl) No. 5333-5347/2016 (II-C) FOR [PERMISSION TO FILE ANNEXURES] ON IA 11524/2016 and IA No.119882/2017-PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS) Date : 21-04-2025 These matters were called on for pronouncement of order today.

2 For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Kiran Javali, Sr. Adv. Mr. Joseph Pookkatt, Adv. Mr. Nilesh Sharma, Adv. Mr. Dhawesh Pahuja, Adv. Ms. Awantika Manohar, Adv. For M/s. AP & J Chambers, AOR Ms. Anitha Shenoy, Sr. Adv. Ms. Srishti Agnihotri, AOR Ms. Ayushma Awasthi, Adv. Ms. Sanjana Grace Thomas, Adv. Mr. D.P.singh, Adv. Ms. Tara Elizabeth Kurien, Adv. Ms. Niharika Srivastava, Adv. Mr. Sajan Poovayya, Sr. Adv. Mr. Mahesh Agarwal, Adv. Mr. Ankur Saigal, Adv. Mr. Ankit Agarwal, Adv. Ms. Kajal Dalal, Adv. Ms. Sanjanthi Sajan Poovayya, Adv. Mr. Uday Aditya Jetley Pocha, Adv. Mr. Palash Maheshwari, Adv. Ms. Sneha Dey, Adv. Mr. Harshvardhan Sharma, Adv. Mr. E. C. Agrawala, AOR Mr. Siddharth Luthra, Sr. Adv. Mr. Siddharth Dave, Sr. Adv. Mr. Sandeep Patil, Adv. Mr. Kush Chaturvedi, AOR Mr. Shubhranshu Padhi, Adv. Mrs. Prerna Priyadarshini, Adv. Ms. Prerna Priyadarshini, Adv. Mr. Syed Faraz Alam, Adv. Mr. Atharva Gaur, Adv. Mr. Aayushman Aggarwal, Adv. Mr. D. Girish Kumar, Adv. Mr. Anmol Kheta, Adv. Mr. Sohail Ahmed, Adv. Mr. Sohail Seth, Adv. Mr. Sahir Seth, Adv. Mr. Nakul Chengappa, Adv. Mr. Himanshu Tyagi, Adv. Mr. Jay Nirupam, Adv. Mr. D Girish Kumar, Adv. Mr. Pranav Giri, Adv. Mr. Ekansh Sisodia, Adv. Mr. Karl P. Rustomkhan, Adv.

3 Mr. D. L. Chidananda, AOR For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vikas Upadhyay, AOR Mr. Ashwin Kumar Nair, Adv. Ms. Ankita Kashyap, Adv. Mr. Gopalakrishna, Adv. Ms. Sneha Abraham, Adv. Ms. Aayushi Sharma, Adv. Mr. Ranveer Singh, Adv. Mr. Wazid Hasan, Adv. Mr. Gaurav Gk, Adv. Mr. Siddharth Luthra, Sr. Adv. Mr. Siddharth Dave, Sr. Adv. Mr. Sandeep Patil, Adv. Mr. Kush Chaturvedi, AOR Mr. Shubhranshu Padhi, Adv. Ms. Prerna Priyadarshini, Adv. Mr. Syed Faraz Alam, Adv. Mr. Atharva Gaur, Adv. Mr. Aayushman Aggarwal, Adv. Mr. Anmol Kheta, Adv. Mr. Sohail Ahmed, Adv. Mr. Sahir Seth, Adv. Mr. Nakul Chengappa, Adv. Mr. Himanshu Tyagi, Adv. Mr. Jay Nirupam, Adv. Mr. D Girish Kumar, Adv. Mr. Pranav Giri, Adv. Mr. Ekansh Sisodia, Adv. Mr. Karl P. Rustomkhan, Adv. Mr. Atif Inam, AOR Ms. Shivani Mittal, Adv. Ms. Ishani Banerjee, Adv. Mr. KV Dhananjay, Adv. Mr. A Velan, AOR Ms. Navpreet Kaur, Adv. Mr. Dheeraj Sj, Adv. Mr. Prince Singh, Adv. Mr. Nilay Rai, Adv. Mr. Kanu Agarwal, Adv. Mr. Madhav Sinhal, Adv. Mr. Aaditya Dixit, Adv. Mr. R Bala, Adv. Ms. Vimla Sinha, Adv. Ms. Prerna Dhal, Adv. Mr. Amrish Kumar, AOR

4 Mr. Sajan Poovayya, Sr. Adv. Mr. Mahesh Agarwal, Adv. Mr. Ankur Saigal, Adv. Mr. Ankit Agarwal, Adv. Ms. Kajal Dalal, Adv. Ms. Sanjanthi Sajan Poovayya, Adv. Mr. Uday Aditya Jetley Pocha, Adv. Mr. Palash Maheshwari, Adv. Ms. Sneha Dey, Adv. Mr. Harshvardhan Sharma, Adv. Mr. E. C. Agrawala, AOR Ms. Anitha Shenoy, Sr. Adv. Ms. Srishti Agnihotri, AOR Ms. Ayushma Awasthi, Adv. Ms. Sanjana Grace Thomas, Adv. Mr. D.P.singh, Adv. Ms. Tara Elizabeth Kurien, Adv. Ms. Niharika Srivastava, Adv. Mr. Kiran Javali, Sr. Adv. Mr. Joseph Pookkatt, Adv. Mr. Nilesh Sharma, Adv. Mr. Dhawesh Pahuja, Adv. Ms. Awantika Manohar, Adv. For M/s. AP & J Chambers, AOR Mr. Vikas Singh, Sr. Adv. Mr. R. Basant, Sr. Adv. Mr. Aman Panwar, A.A.G. Mr. Prateek K Chadha, A.A.G. Mr. V. N. Raghupathy, AOR Ms. Deepika Kalia, Adv. Mr. Nishaank Mattoo, Adv. Ms. Vasudha Singh, Adv. Mr. Sudeep Chandra, Adv. Mr. Naman Vashishtha, Adv. Mr. Akash Rajeev, Adv. Mr. Shrey Brahmbhatt, Adv. Mr. Akash Panwar, Adv. 1. Hon’ble Mr. Justice J.B. Pardiwala pronounced the Order of the Bench comprising His Lordship and Hon’ble Mr. Justice Manoj Misra. 2. However, while preparing the judgment, on the issue relating to applicability of Aiyappa’s decision we came across an order of this court dated 16.04.2024 passed by a coordinate bench of this Court in SLP (Crl) Nos.3567-3568/2017 “ Shamin Khan vs. Debashish Chakrabarty & Ors .”, which reads as under:

5 “Heard learned counsel on both sides. Upon hearing the learned counsel and on perusing the materials on record, we find that the question which was already referred to a larger Bench, as per the judgment in “ Manju Surana vs. Sunil Arora & Ors .” (2018) 5 SCC 557, is involved in this case as well. The question referred under the judgment in Manju Surana’s case (supra) is whether, while directing an investigation in terms of provisions under Section 156(3) of the CrPC, the Magistrate is applying his mind. In other words, whether the Magistrate takes ‘cognizance at that stage’. We are of the considered view that scanning of the provisions under Sections 156(3), 173(2), 190, 200, 202, 203 and 204 of the CrPC would, prima facie, reveal that while directing for an investigation and forwarding the complaint therefor, the Magistrate is not actually taking cognizance. However, since the said question is referred as per the above judgment, judicial discipline and propriety dissuade us from proceeding further with the case and hence, we order to tag the captioned matters also along with the matter(s) already referred. Ordered accordingly. The judgment in Manju Surana (supra) would reveal that the matters were referred to larger Bench on 27.3.2018. Considering the fact that question involved is a matter of relevance and such issues arises frequently for consideration before Courts, we are of the considered view that an earlier decision on the question referred is solicited. Registry is directed to place these matters before the Hon’ble the Chief Justice of India for appropriate orders.” (Emphasis supplied) 3. As for maintaining judicial discipline a coordinate bench of this Court has refrained from proceeding further in deciding the underlying issue 1 , which is under reference to a larger bench, we deem it appropriate to tag these petitions with the referred matter Manju Surana vs. Sunil Arora & Ors.” (supra). 4. The registry is directed to place these matters before the Hon’ble Chief Justice of India for appropriate orders. (VISHAL ANAND) (POOJA SHARMA) ASTT. REGISTRAR-cum-PS COURT MASTER (NSH) (Signed Order is placed on the file) 1

Whether the bar of Section 19 of the PC Act would be applicable on exercise of power under Section 156 (3) of CrPC.

ITEM NO.10 REGISTRAR COURT SECTION II S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE REGISTRAR MS. SUJATA SINGH Criminal Appeal No(s). 457/2018 MANJU SURANA Appellant(s) VERSUS RATAN SINGH & ORS. Respondent(s) Date : 16-04-2025 This appeal was called on for hearing today. For Appellant(s) : Mr. Prashant Bhushan, AOR Mr. Rahul Gupta, Adv. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Merusagar Samantaray, AOR Mr. Gautam Jha, AOR Mr. Nishant Ramakantrao Katneshwarkar, AOR Ms. Radhika Gupta, AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Respondent No.1 has been deleted from the array of parties vide Hon’ble Court's order dated 27.03.2018. Respondent Nos.2, 3, 5 and 8 are duly represented. It has been submitted by the Ld. Advocate-on-record, Ms.Radhika Gupta that she is no longer appearing for respondent No.8. Let appropriate application be filed in that behalf within two weeks. Ld. counsel for respondent No.6 has been designated as Senior Advocate. Ld. counsel for the appellant has filed contd….

-2- spare copy instead of filing fresh particulars for alternative arrangement notice, despite the grant of last opportunity. Today, it has been submitted by Ld. counsel for the appellant that permission be granted to serve respondent No.6 through paper publication. Let appropriate application be filed in this behalf within two weeks. Service is complete on respondent Nos.4 and 7 but none has entered appearance. Original records of High Court and Trial Court have been received. Let soft copy of the same be provided to the Ld. Counsels for the parties in light of Circular F.no.01/Judl./2025, dated 10.01.2025. List again on 15.7.2025. SUJATA SINGH rd Registrar

46543/2021,FOR EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. ON IA 46546/2021,FOR APPLICATION FOR MODIFICATION OF PARTY DETAILS / CHALLENGED JUDGEMENT DETAILS ON IA 35851/2023, IA No. 35851/2023 - APPLICATION FOR MODIFICATION OF PARTY DETAILS / CHALLENGED JUDGEMENT DETAILS IA No. 46546/2021 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T., IA No. 46543/2021 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES SLP(Crl) No. 3372/2021 (II-C) FOR EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT ON IA 56807/2021,FOR EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. ON IA 56808/2021 IA No. 56807/2021 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT, IA No. 56808/2021 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. SLP(Crl) No. 9361/2021 (II-C) IA No. 51957/2022 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 157936/2021 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES SLP(Crl) No. 8675/2022 (II-C) IA No. 138597/2022 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. IA No. 138595/2022 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES SLP(Crl) No. 5333-5347/2016 (II-C) FOR [PERMISSION TO FILE ANNEXURES] ON IA 11524/2016 and IA No.119882/2017-PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS IA No. 119882/2017 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES, IA No. 11524/2016 - PERMISSION TO FILE ANNEXURES Date : 04-04-2025 These matters were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.B. PARDIWALA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ MISRA SLP(Crl.) No.520/2021 2

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Siddharth Luthra, Sr. Adv. Mr. Siddharth Dave, Sr. Adv. Mr. Kiran Javali, Sr. Adv. M/S. Ap & J Chambers, AOR Mr. Joseph Pookkatt, Adv. Mr. Nilesh Sharma, Adv. Mr. Dhawesh Pahuja, Adv. Ms. Awantika Manohar, Adv. Ms. Anitha Shenoy, Sr. Adv. Ms. Srishti Agnihotri, AOR Ms. Ayushma Awasthi, Adv. Ms. Sanjana Grace Thomas, Adv. Mr. D.p.singh, Adv. Ms. Tara Elizabeth Kurien, Adv. Ms. Niharika Srivastava, Adv. Mr. Sajan Poovayya, Sr. Adv. Mr. Mahesh Agarwal, Adv. Mr. Ankur Saigal, Adv. Mr. Ankit Agarwal, Adv. Ms. Kajal Dalal, Adv. Ms. Sanjanthi Sajan Poovayya, Adv. Mr. Uday Aditya Jetley Pocha, Adv. Mr. Palash Maheshwari, Adv. Ms. Sneha Dey, Adv. Mr. Harshvardhan Sharma, Adv. Mr. E. C. Agrawala, AOR Mr. Sidharth Luthra, Sr. Adv. Mr. Siddharth Dave, Adv. Mr. Sandeep Patil, Adv. Mr. Kush Chaturvedi, AOR Mr. Shubhranshu Padhi, Adv. Ms. Prerna Priyadarshini, Adv. Mrs. Prerna Priyadarshini, Adv. Mr. Syed Faraz Alam, Adv. Mr. Atharva Gaur, Adv. Mr. Aayushman Aggarwal, Adv. SLP(Crl.) No.520/2021 3

Mr. D. Girish Kumar, Adv. Mr. Anmol Kheta, Adv. Mr. Sohail Ahmed, Adv. Mr. Sohail Seth, Adv. Mr. Sahir Seth, Adv. Mr. Nakul Chengappa, Adv. Mr. Himanshu Tyagi, Adv. Mr. Jay Nirupam, Adv. Mr. D Girish Kumar, Adv. Mr. Pranav Giri, Adv. Mr. Ekansh Sisodia, Adv. Mr. Karl P. Rustomkhan, Adv. Mr. Vikas Singh, Sr. Adv. Mr. Prateek Chadha, A.A.G. Mr. D. L. Chidananda, AOR For Respondent(s) :Mr. Ashwin Kumar Nair, Adv. Ms. Ankita Kashyap, Adv. Mr. Gaurav Gk, Adv. Mr. Gopalakrishna, Adv. Ms. Sneha Abraham, Adv. Ms. Aayushi Sharma, Adv. Mr. Ranveer Singh, Adv. Mr. Wazid Hasan, Adv. Mr. Vikas Upadhyay, AOR Mr. Atif Inam, AOR Ms. Shivani Mittal, Adv. Ms. Ishani Banerjee, Adv. Mr. Siddharth Luthra, Sr. Adv. Mr. Siddharth Dave, Sr. Adv. Mr. Sandeep Patil, Adv. Mr. Kush Chaturvedi, AOR Mr. Shubhranshu Padhi, Adv. Ms. Prerna Priyadarshini, Adv. Mr. Syed Faraz Alam, Adv. Mr. Atharva Gaur, Adv. Mr. Aayushman Aggarwal, Adv. SLP(Crl.) No.520/2021 4

Mr. Anmol Kheta, Adv. Mr. Sohail Ahmed, Adv. Mr. Sahir Seth, Adv. Mr. Nakul Chengappa, Adv. Mr. Himanshu Tyagi, Adv. Mr. Jay Nirupam, Adv. Mr. D Girish Kumar, Adv. Mr. Pranav Giri, Adv. Mr. Ekansh Sisodia, Adv. Mr. Karl P. Rustomkhan, Adv. Mr. Sajan Poovayya, Sr. Adv. Mr. Mahesh Agarwal, Adv. Mr. Ankur Saigal, Adv. Mr. Ankit Agarwal, Adv. Ms. Kajal Dalal, Adv. Ms. Sanjanthi Sajan Poovayya, Adv. Mr. Uday Aditya Jetley Pocha, Adv. Mr. Palash Maheshwari, Adv. Ms. Sneha Dey, Adv. Mr. Harshvardhan Sharma, Adv. Mr. E. C. Agrawala, AOR Mr. Kv Dhananjay, Adv. Mr. A Velan, AOR Ms. Navpreet Kaur, Adv. Mr. Prince Singh, Adv. Mr. Nilay Rai, Adv. Mr. Dheeraj Sj, Adv. Mr. Tushar Mehta, Solicitor General Mr. Kanu Agarwal, Adv. Mr. Madhav Sinhal, Adv. Mr. Aaditya Dixit, Adv. Mr. R Bala, Adv. Ms. Vimla Sinha, Adv. Ms. Prerna Dhal, Adv. Mr. Amrish Kumar, AOR Ms. Anitha Shenoy, Sr. Adv. Ms. Srishti Agnihotri, AOR SLP(Crl.) No.520/2021 5

Ms. Ayushma Awasthi, Adv. Ms. Sanjana Grace Thomas, Adv. Mr. D.P. Singh, Adv. Ms. Tara Elizabeth Kurien, Adv. Ms. Niharika Srivastava, Adv. M/S. Ap & J Chambers, AOR Mr. Kiran Javali, Sr. Adv. Mr. Joseph Pookkatt, Adv. Mr. Nilesh Sharma, Adv. Mr. Dhawesh Pahuja, Adv. Ms. Awantika Manohar, Adv. Mr. Vikas Singh, Sr. Adv. Mr. R. Basant, Sr. Adv. Mr. Aman Panwar, A.A.G. Mr. Prateek K Chadha, A.A.G. Mr. V. N. Raghupathy, AOR Ms. Deepika Kalia, Adv. Mr. Nishaank Mattoo, Adv. Ms. Vasudha Singh, Adv. Mr. Sudeep Chandra, Adv. Mr. Naman Vashishtha, Adv. Mr. Akash Rajeev, Adv. Mr. Shrey Brahmbhatt, Adv. Mr. Rishabh Manjal, Adv. Mr. Devrishi Tyagi, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R ITEM NO.301-SLP(Crl.) No.520/2021 1. Arguments concluded. 2. Broadly the following questions fall for consideration of this Court:- I. What are the relevant considerations as contemplated by SLP(Crl.) No.520/2021 6

Section 17A of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (for short, “the PC Act”) which the appropriate authority or government is expected to look into before the grant of approval for initiation of any enquiry, inquiry, or investigation by the police? II. Whether the considerations which weigh with the appropriate authority or government while granting approval under Section 17A of the PC Act are fundamentally so different from the one that a Magistrate is ordinarily expected to apply while passing an order under Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short, “the Cr.P.C.”) so as to preclude the Magistrate from fulfilling the object underlying Section 17A of the PC Act? In other words, whether the considerations under Section 17A of the PC Act are of such a nature that they are necessarily beyond the ambit or scope of consideration by a Magistrate while directing an investigation under Section 156(3) of the Cr.P.C.? III. As a natural corollary of the aforesaid, could it be said that once a Magistrate has applied his mind under Section 156(3) of the Cr.P.C., the requirement of a prior approval under Section 17A of the PC Act is meaningless, redundant and no longer necessary? Could it be said that a police officer, despite a direction under Section 156(3) by a Magistrate, would remain inhibited from SLP(Crl.) No.520/2021 7

conducting any enquiry, inquiry, or investigation without prior approval as required by Section 17A? If yes, how does the standard of application of mind by the appropriate authority differ from that of the Magistrate? IV. In case of a private complaint, whether Section 19 of the PC Act, more particularly parts (i) and (ii) of the First Proviso therein contemplates that sanction would be required only after the Magistrate first completes the stage of examining the complainant and / or causing a magisterial inquiry wherever necessary in terms of Section(s) 200 and 202 of the Cr.P.C. respectively? In other words, whether the three conditions envisaged under the First Proviso, namely that a complaint has been filed as per Part (i) and that the court has not only not dismissed such complaint but also explicitly directed the obtainment of sanction as per Part (ii), necessarily implies that it is open for the Magistrate to proceed in terms of Chapter XV more particularly under Section(s) 200, 202 and 203 even without the grant of sanction under Section 19 of the PC Act? If so, whether such an interpretation is limited only for the purpose of “cognizance” under Section 19 of the PC Act? V. Whether, Part (ii) of the First Proviso to Section 19 of the PC Act, more particularly the expression “the court has not dismissed the complaint under section 203” necessarily envisages that the Magistrate ought to have first considered the statements of the complainant and SLP(Crl.) No.520/2021 8

the witnesses(s) and / or of any magisterial inquiry in terms of Section(s) 200 and 202 of the Cr.P.C.? In other words, could it be said that the Magistrate takes cognizance only after deciding not to dismiss the complaint under Section 203 especially in light of the decision in Legal Remembrancer v. Abani Kumar Banerji, reported in 1950 SCC OnLine Cal 49, which observed thus:- “9. I have for myself no hesitation in feeling that there is nothing which would justify our referring the matter to the Full Bench. As I read s. 190 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and the subsequent sections, it seems to me to be clear that a magistrate is not bound to take cognizance of an offence, merely because a petition of complaint is filed before him. Mr. Mukherji's argument is that a magistrate cannot possibly take any action with regard to a petition of complaint, without applying his mind to it, and taking cognizance of the offence mentioned in the complaint necessarily takes place, when the magistrate's mind is applied to the petition. Consequently Mr. Mukherji argues, whenever a magistrate takes the action, say, of issuing search warrant or asking the police to enquire and to investigate, he has taken cognizance of the case. In my judgment, this is putting a wrong connotation on the words “taking cognizance”. What is “taking cognizance” has not been defined in the Code of Criminal Procedure, and I have no desire now to attempt to define it. It seems to me clear, however, that before it can be said that any magistrate has taken cognizance of any offence under s. 190(1)(a) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, he must not only have applied his mind to the contents of the petition, but he must have done so for the SLP(Crl.) No.520/2021 9

purpose of proceeding in a particular way as indicated in the subsequent provisions of this Chapter,—proceeding under s. 200, and thereafter sending it for enquiry and report under s. 202 . When the magistrate applies his mind not for the purpose of proceeding under the subsequent sections of this Chapter, but for taking action of some other kind, e.g., ordering investigation under s. 156(3), or issuing a search warrant for the purpose of the investigation, he cannot be said to have taken cognizance of the offence. My conclusion, therefore, is that the learned magistrate is wrong in thinking that the Chief Presidency Magistrate was bound to take cognizance of the case as soon as the petition of complaint was filed.” (Emphasis supplied) VI. Whether it could be said that the First Proviso to Section 19 of the PC Act is detached from the substantive part contained in sub-section (1) of the said provision? VII. Whether the requirements introduced by Section 17A and the amended Section 19 of the PC Act could be said to be retrospectively applicable? Since the aforesaid procedural changes were brought in tandem with the substantive changes in the very offences itself as provided under Section(s) 7, 11, 13 and 15 respectively of the PC Act by way of the 2018 Amendment Act, whether the same necessarily implies that the introduction of Section 17A as-well as the amendment of Section 19 were not merely procedural but also substantive in nature, and thus, only ought to be SLP(Crl.) No.520/2021 10

applicable prospectively? In other words, whether the conspectus of amendments to the PC Act, i.e., Section(s) 7, 11, 13, 15, 17A and 19 respectively is so intrinsically intertwined with each other in such a manner that they can neither survive without each other nor can they be read in isolation from one another and thus can only be regarded as nothing but substantive in nature? Notwithstanding the fact that the changes brought about by Section 17A and the amended Section 19 of the PC Act are substantive in nature and not merely procedural, could it be said that the said provisions would nevertheless have a retrospective effect by virtue of the said provisions either being clarificatory and explanatory in nature or having the effect of providing certain safeguards and benefits to the accused persons under the PC Act that ought to enure to the benefit of an accused retrospectively?” 3. Judgment reserved. 4. The learned counsel appearing for the parties shall file their written submissions along with the case law they propose to rely upon not only addressing the issues formulated by this Court but on any other issue also within a period of two weeks from today. 5. So far as the connected petitions are concerned they shall be SLP(Crl.) No.520/2021 11

looked into after we deliver the judgment in Item No.301 i.e. SLP (Crl.) No.520/2021. 6. The learned counsel appearing in the connected matters may also file their written submissions on the issues arising in the matter(s) which we have heard and concluded. 7. A soft copy of the written submissions shall also be forwarded to writtensubmissions.jbp@gmail.com . (CHANDRESH) (POOJA SHARMA) ASTT. REGISTRAR-cum-PS COURT MASTER (NSH) SLP(Crl.) No.520/2021 12

ITEM NO.301 COURT NO.13 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 for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No.520/2021 [Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 05-01-2021 in CRLP No. 9361/2016 passed by the High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru] B.S YEDDIYURAPPA Petitioner(s) VERSUS A ALAM PASHA & ORS. Respondent(s) (IA No. 13491/2021 - INTERVENTION APPLICATION & IA No. 13494/2021 - PERMISSION TO APPEAR AND ARGUE IN PERSON) WITH SLP(Crl) No. 758/2021 (II-C) FOR PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES ON IA 10975/2021 & IA No. 10975/2021 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES) SLP(Crl) No. 2318/2021 (II-C) (FOR PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES ON IA 37664/2021 & FOR EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT ON IA 37670/2021) SLP(Crl) No. 2753/2021 (II-C) (FOR PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES ON IA 46543/2021, FOR EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. ON IA 46546/2021, FOR APPLICATION FOR MODIFICATION OF PARTY DETAILS / CHALLENGED JUDGEMENT DETAILS ON IA 35851/2023) SLP(Crl) No. 3372/2021 (II-C) (FOR EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT ON IA 56807/2021 & FOR EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. ON IA 56808/2021) SLP(Crl) No. 9361/2021 (II-C) (IA No. 51957/2022 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS & IA No.157936/2021 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/ FACTS/ANNEXURES) SLP(Crl) No. 8675/2022 (II-C) (IA No. 138597/2022 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. & IA No.138595/2022 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/ FACTS/ANNEXURES) SLP(Crl) No. 5333-5347/2016 (II-C) (FOR [PERMISSION TO FILE ANNEXURES] ON IA 11524/2016 and IA No.119882/2017-PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS) Date : 28-03-2025 These matters were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.B. PARDIWALA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ MISRA

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Kiran Javali, Sr. Adv. Mr. Joseph Pookkatt, Adv. Mr. Nilesh Sharma, Adv. Mr. Dhawesh Pahuja, Adv. Ms. Awantika Manohar, Adv. For M/s. AP & J Chambers, AOR Ms. Anitha Shenoy, Sr. Adv. Ms. Srishti Agnihotri, AOR Ms. Ayushma Awasthi, Adv. Ms. Sanjana Grace Thomas, Adv. Mr. D.p.singh, Adv. Ms. Tara Elizabeth Kurien, Adv. Mr. Sajan Poovayya, Sr. Adv. Mr. Mahesh Agarwal, Adv. Mr. Ankur Saigal, Adv. Mr. Ankit Agarwal, Adv. Ms. Kajal Dalal, Adv. Ms. Sanjanthi Sajan Poovayya, Adv. Mr. Uday Aditya Jetley Pocha, Adv. Mr. Palash Maheshwari, Adv. Ms. Sneha Dey, Adv. Mr. Harshvardhan Sharma, Adv. Mr. E. C. Agrawala, AOR Mr. Siddharth Luthra, Sr. Adv. Mr. Siddharth Dave, Sr. Adv. Mr. Sandeep Patil, Adv. Mr. Kush Chaturvedi, AOR Mr. Shubhranshu Padhi, Adv. Mrs. Prerna Priyadarshini, Adv. Ms. Prerna Priyadarshini, Adv. Mr. Syed Faraz Alam, Adv. Mr. Atharva Gaur, Adv. Mr. Aayushman Aggarwal, Adv. Mr. D. Girish Kumar, Adv. Mr. Anmol Kheta, Adv. Mr. Sohail Ahmed, Adv. Mr. Sohail Seth, Adv. Mr. Sahir Seth, Adv. Mr. Nakul Chengappa, Adv. Mr. Himanshu Tyagi, Adv. Mr. Jay Nirupam, Adv. Mr. D Girish Kumar, Adv. Mr. Pranav Giri, Adv. Mr. Ekansh Sisodia, Adv. Mr. Shaurya Gupta, Adv. Mr. D. L. Chidananda, AOR For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vikas Upadhyay, AOR Mr. Ashwin Kumar Nair, Adv.

Ms. Ankita Kashyap, Adv. Mr. Gaurav Gk,, Adv. Mr. Mr. Gopalakrishna,, Adv. Ms. Sneha Abrah, Adv. Mr. Ranveer Singh, Adv. Mr. Wazid Hasan, Adv. Mr. Atif Inam, AOR Ms. Shivani Mittal, Adv. Ms. Ishani Banerjee, Adv. Mr. Siddharth Luthra, Sr. Adv. Mr. Siddharth Dave, Sr. Adv. Mr. Sandeep Patil, Adv. Mr. Kush Chaturvedi, AOR Mr. Shubhranshu Padhi, Adv. Ms. Prerna Priyadarshini, Adv. Mr. Syed Faraz Alam, Adv. Mr. Atharva Gaur, Adv. Mr. Aayushman Aggarwal, Adv. Mr. Shaurya Gupta, Adv. Mr. Anmol Kheta, Adv. Mr. Sohail Ahmed, Adv. Mr. Sahir Seth, Adv. Mr. Nakul Chengappa, Adv. Mr. Himanshu Tyagi, Adv. Mr. Jay Nirupam, Adv. Mr. D Girish Kumar, Adv. Mr. Pranav Giri, Adv. Mr. Ekansh Sisodia, Adv. Mr. Sajan Poovayya, Sr. Adv. Mr. Mahesh Agarwal, Adv. Mr. Ankur Saigal, Adv. Mr. Ankit Agarwal, Adv. Ms. Kajal Dalal, Adv. Ms. Sanjanthi Sajan Poovayya, Adv. Mr. Uday Aditya Jetley Pocha, Adv. Mr. Palash Maheshwari, Adv. Ms. Sneha Dey, Adv. Mr. Harshvardhan Sharma, Adv. Mr. E. C. Agrawala, AOR Mr. K V Dhananjay, Adv. Mr. A Velan, AOR Mr. Navpreet Kaur, Adv. Mr. Prince Singh, Adv. Mr. Nilay Rai, Adv. Mr. Tushar Mehta, Solicitor General Mr. Kanu Agarwal, Adv. Mr. Madhav Sinhal, Adv. Mr. Aaditya Dixit, Adv. Mr. R Bala, Adv.

Ms. Vimla Sinha, Adv. Ms. Prerna Dhal, Adv. Mr. Amrish Kumar, AOR Ms. Anitha Shenoy, Sr. Adv. Ms. Srishti Agnihotri, AOR Ms. Ayushma Awasthi, Adv. Ms. Sanjana Grace Thomas, Adv. Mr. D.p.singh, Adv. Ms. Tara Elizabeth Kurien, Adv. Mr. Kiran Javali, Sr. Adv. Mr. Joseph Pookkatt, Adv. Mr. Nilesh Sharma, Adv. Mr. Dhawesh Pahuja, Adv. Ms. Awantika Manohar, Adv. For M/s. AP & J Chambers, AOR Mr. Vikas Singh, Sr. Adv. Mr. R. Basant, Sr. Adv. Mr. Aman Panwar, A.A.G. Mr. Prateek K Chadha, A.A.G. Mr. V. N. Raghupathy, AOR Ms. Deepika Kalia, Adv. Mr. Nishaank Mattoo, Adv. Ms. Vasudha Singh, Adv. Mr. Sudeep Chandra, Adv. Mr. Naman Vashishtha, Adv. Mr. Akash Rajeev, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R List the matters on Friday, 4 th April, 2025 at 2.00 p.m. as part-heard for further hearing. (VISHAL ANAND) (POOJA SHARMA) ASTT. REGISTRAR-cum-PS COURT MASTER (NSH)

1 ITEM NO.301 COURT NO.13 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). 520/2021 [Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 05-01-2021 in CRLP No. 9361/2016 passed by the High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru] B.S YEDDIYURAPPA PETITIONER(S) VERSUS A ALAM PASHA & ORS. RESPONDENT(S) (IA No. 13491/2021 - INTERVENTION APPLICATION IA No. 13494/2021 - PERMISSION TO APPEAR AND ARGUE IN PERSON) WITH SLP(Crl.) No.758/2021 (II-C) (IA No. 10975/2021 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES) SLP(Crl.) No. 2318/2021 (II-C) (IA No. 37670/2021 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT IA No. 37664/2021 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES) SLP(Crl.) No. 2753/2021 (II-C) (IA No. 35851/2023 - APPLICATION FOR MODIFICATION OF PARTY DETAILS / CHALLENGED JUDGEMENT DETAILS IA No. 46546/2021 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. IA No. 46543/2021 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES) SLP(Crl.) No.3372/2021 (II-C) (IA No. 56807/2021 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT IA No. 56808/2021 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T.) SLP(Crl.) No.9361/2021 (II-C) IA No. 51957/2022 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 157936/2021 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES SLP(Crl.) No.8675/2022 (II-C) (IA No. 138597/2022 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. IA No. 138595/2022 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES SLP(Crl.) Nos.5333-5347/2016 (II-C)

2 (IA No. 119882/2017 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES IA No. 11524/2016 - PERMISSION TO FILE ANNEXURES) Date : 06-03-2025 These matters were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.B. PARDIWALA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ MISRA For Petitioner(s) :Ms. Anitha Shenoy, Sr. Adv. Ms. Srishti Agnihotri, AOR Ms. Ayushma Awasthi, Adv. Ms. Sanjana Grace Thomas, Adv. Mr. D.P.singh, Adv. Ms. Tara Elizabeth Kurien, Adv. Mr. Sajan Poovayya, Sr. Adv. Mr. Mahesh Agarwal, Adv. Mr. Ankur Saigal, Adv. Mr. Ankit Agarwal, Adv. Ms. Kajal Dalal, Adv. Ms. Sanjanthi Sajan Poovayya, Adv. Mr. Uday Aditya Jetley Pocha, Adv. Mr. Palash Maheshwari, Adv. Ms. Sneha Dey, Adv. Mr. Harshvardhan Sharma, Adv. Mr. E. C. Agrawala, AOR Mr. Sidharth Luthra, Sr. Adv. Mr. Siddharth Dave, Sr. Adv. Mr. Sandeep Patil, Adv. Mr. Kush Chaturvedi, AOR Mr. Shubhranshu Padhi, Adv. Ms. Prerna Priyadarshini, Adv. Mr. Syed Faraz Alam, Adv. Mr. Atharva Gaur, Adv. Mr. Aayushman Aggarwal, Adv. Mr. D. Girish Kumar, Adv. Mr. Shaurya Gupta, Adv. Mr. Anmol Kheta, Adv. Mr. Sohail Ahmed, Adv. Mr. Sohail Seth, Adv. Mr. Sahir Seth, Adv. Mr. Nakul Chengappa, Adv. Mr. Himanshu Tyagi, Adv. Mr. Jay Nirupam, Adv. Mr. D Girish Kumar, Adv. Mr. Pranav Giri, Adv. Mr. Ekansh Sisodia, Adv. For M/S. AP & J Chambers, AOR Mr. Kiran Javali, Sr. Adv.

3 Mr. Joseph Pookkatt, Adv. Mr. Nilesh Sharma, Adv. Ms. Awantika Manohar, Adv. Mr. Dhawesh Pahuja, Adv. Mr. Vikas Singh, Sr. Adv. Mr. Prateek Chadha, A.A.G. Mr. D. L. Chidananda, AOR For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vikas Upadhyay, AOR Mr. Ashwin Kumar Nair,Adv. Ms. Ankita Kashyap,Adv. Mr. Gaurav G.K., Adv. Mr. Gopal Krishna, Adv. Ms. Sneha Abrahm, Adv. Mr. Wazid Hasan, Adv. Mr. Ranveer Singh, Adv. Mr. Atif Inam, AOR Mr. Siddharth Luthra, Sr. Adv. Mr. Siddharth Dave, Sr. Adv. Mr. Sandeep Patil, Adv. Mr. Kush Chaturvedi, AOR Mr. Shubhranshu Padhi, Adv. Ms. Prerna Priyadarshini, Adv. Mr. Syed Faraz Alam, Adv. Mr. Atharva Gaur, Adv. Mr. Aayushman Aggarwal, Adv. Mr. Shaurya Gupta, Adv. Mr. Anmol Kheta, Adv. Mr. Sohail Ahmed, Adv. Mr. Sahir Seth, Adv. Mr. Nakul Chengappa, Adv. Mr. Himanshu Tyagi, Adv. Mr. Jay Nirupam, Adv. Mr. D Girish Kumar, Adv. Mr. Pranav Giri, Adv. Mr. Ekansh Sisodia, Adv. Mr. Sajan Poovayya, Sr. Adv. Mr. Mahesh Agarwal, Adv. Mr. Ankur Saigal, Adv. Mr. Ankit Agarwal, Adv. Ms. Kajal Dalal, Adv. Ms. Sanjanthi Sajan Poovayya, Adv. Mr. Uday Aditya Jetley Pocha, Adv. Mr. Palash Maheshwari, Adv. Ms. Sneha Dey, Adv. Mr. Harshvardhan Sharma, Adv. Mr. E. C. Agrawala, AOR

4 Mr. A Velan , AOR Mr. Tushar Mehta, Solicitor General (NP) Mr. Kanu Agarwal, Adv.(NP) Mr. Madhav Sinhal, Adv. Mr. Aaditya Dixit, Adv. Mr. R Bala, Adv. Ms. Vimla Sinha, Adv. Mr. Amrish Kumar, AOR Ms. Anitha Shenoy, Sr. Adv. Ms. Srishti Agnihotri, AOR Ms. Ayushma Awasthi, Adv. Ms. Sanjana Grace Thomas, Adv. Mr. D.p.singh, Adv. Ms. Tara Elizabeth Kurien, Adv. M/S. Ap & J Chambers, AOR Mr. Kiran Javali, Sr. Adv. Mr. Joseph Pookkatt, Adv. Mr. Nilesh Sharma, Adv. Ms. Awantika Manohar, Adv. Mr. Dhawesh Pahuja, Adv. Mr. Vikas Singh, Sr. Adv. Mr. R. Basant, Sr. Adv. Mr. Aman Panwar, A.A.G. Mr. V. N. Raghupathy, AOR Ms. Deepika Kalia, Adv. Mr. Nishaank Mattoo, Adv. Ms. Vasudha Singh, Adv. Mr. Sudeep Chandra, Adv. Mr. Naman Vashishtha, Adv. Mr. Akash Rajeev, Adv. Mr. Shivansh Saxena, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R 1. List these matters on 21 st March, 2025 (Friday) at 2:00 pm. (JAGDISH KUMAR) (POOJA SHARMA) COURT MASTER (SH) COURT MASTER (NSH)

1 ITEM NO.301 COURT NO.13 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). 520/2021 [Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 05-01-2021 in CRLP No. 9361/2016 passed by the High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru] B.S YEDDIYURAPPA Petitioner(s) VERSUS A ALAM PASHA & ORS. Respondent(s) IA No. 13491/2021 - INTERVENTION APPLICATION IA No. 13494/2021 - PERMISSION TO APPEAR AND ARGUE IN PERSON WITH SLP(Crl) No. 758/2021 (II-C) FOR PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES ON IA 10975/2021 IA No. 10975/2021 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES SLP(Crl) No. 2318/2021 (II-C) FOR FOR PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES ON IA 37664/2021 FOR EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT ON IA 37670/2021 IA No. 37670/2021 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT IA No. 37664/2021 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES SLP(Crl) No. 2753/2021 (II-C) FOR FOR PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES ON IA 46543/2021 FOR EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. ON IA 46546/2021 FOR APPLICATION FOR MODIFICATION OF PARTY DETAILS / CHALLENGED JUDGEMENT DETAILS ON IA 35851/2023 IA No. 35851/2023 - APPLICATION FOR MODIFICATION OF PARTY DETAILS / CHALLENGED JUDGEMENT DETAILS IA No. 46546/2021 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. IA No. 46543/2021 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES SLP(Crl) No. 3372/2021 (II-C) FOR EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT ON IA 56807/2021 FOR EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. ON IA 56808/2021

2 IA No. 56807/2021 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT IA No. 56808/2021 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. SLP(Crl) No. 9361/2021 (II-C) IA No. 51957/2022 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 157936/2021 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES SLP(Crl) No. 8675/2022 (II-C) IA No. 138597/2022 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. IA No. 138595/2022 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES SLP(Crl) No. 5333-5347/2016 (II-C) FOR [PERMISSION TO FILE ANNEXURES] ON IA 11524/2016 and IA No.119882/2017-PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS IA No. 119882/2017 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES IA No. 11524/2016 - PERMISSION TO FILE ANNEXURES Date : 28-02-2025 These matters were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.B. PARDIWALA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ MISRA For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Kiran Javali, Sr. Adv. Mr. Joseph Pookkatt, Adv. Mr. Nilesh Sharma, Adv. Mr. Dhawesh Pahuja, Adv. Ms. Awantika Manohar, Adv. For M/s.AP & J Chambers, AOR Ms. Anitha Shenoy, Sr. Adv. Ms. Srishti Agnihotri, AOR Ms. Ayushma Awasthi, Adv. Ms. Sanjana Grace Thomas, Adv. Mr. D.p.singh, Adv. Ms. Tara Elizabeth Kurien, Adv. Mr. Sajan Poovayya, Sr. Adv. Mr. Mahesh Agarwal, Adv. Mr. Ankur Saigal, Adv. Mr. Ankit Agarwal, Adv. Ms. Kajal Dalal, Adv. Ms. Sanjanthi Sajan Poovayya, Adv. Mr. Uday Aditya Jetley Pocha, Adv. Mr. Palash Maheshwari, Adv. Ms. Sneha Dey, Adv. Mr. Harshvardhan Sharma, Adv. Mr. E. C. Agrawala, AOR

3 Mr. Sidharth Luthra, Sr. Adv. Mr. Siddharth Dave, Sr. Adv. Mr. Sandeep Patil, Adv. Mr. Kush Chaturvedi, AOR Mr. Shubhranshu Padhi, Adv. Ms. Prerna Priyadarshini, Adv. Mrs. Prerna Priyadarshini, Adv. Mr. Syed Faraz Alam, Adv. Mr. Atharva Gaur, Adv. Mr. Aayushman Aggarwal, Adv. Mr. D. Girish Kumar, Adv. Mr. Shaurya Gupta, Adv. Mr. Anmol Kheta, Adv. Mr. Sohail Ahmed, Adv. Mr. Sohail Seth, Adv. Mr. Sahir Seth, Adv. Mr. Nakul Chengappa, Adv. Mr. Himanshu Tyagi, Adv. Mr. Jay Nirupam, Adv. Mr. D Girish Kumar, Adv. Mr. Pranav Giri, Adv. Mr. Ekansh Sisodia, Adv. Mr. Vikas Singh, Sr. Adv. Mr. Prateek Chadha, A.A.G. Mr. D. L. Chidananda, AOR For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vikas Upadhyay, AOR Mr. Ashwin Kumar Nair, Adv. Ms. Ankita Kashyap, Adv. Mr. Gaurav Gk,, Adv. Mr. Gopalakrishna, Adv. Ms. Sneha Abraham, Adv. Mr. Wazid Hasan, Adv. Mr. Rahul Verma, Adv. Mr. Atif Inam, AOR Mr. Siddharth Luthra, Sr. Adv. Mr. Siddharth Dave, Sr. Adv. Mr. Sandeep Patil, Adv. Mr. Kush Chaturvedi, AOR Mr. Shubhranshu Padhi, Adv. Ms. Prerna Priyadarshini, Adv. Mr. Syed Faraz Alam, Adv. Mr. Atharva Gaur, Adv. Mr. Aayushman Aggarwal, Adv. Mr. Shaurya Gupta, Adv. Mr. Anmol Kheta, Adv. Mr. Sohail Ahmed, Adv. Mr. Sahir Seth, Adv.

4 Mr. Nakul Chengappa, Adv. Mr. Himanshu Tyagi, Adv. Mr. Jay Nirupam, Adv. Mr. D Girish Kumar, Adv. Mr. Pranav Giri, Adv. Mr. Ekansh Sisodia, Adv. Mr. Sajan Poovayya, Sr. Adv. Mr. Mahesh Agarwal, Adv. Mr. Ankur Saigal, Adv. Mr. Ankit Agarwal, Adv. Ms. Kajal Dalal, Adv. Ms. Sanjanthi Sajan Poovayya, Adv. Mr. Uday Aditya Jetley Pocha, Adv. Mr. Palash Maheshwari, Adv. Ms. Sneha Dey, Adv. Mr. Harshvardhan Sharma, Adv. Mr. E. C. Agrawala, AOR Mr. K V Dhananjay, Adv. Mr. A Velan, AOR Ms. Navpreet Kaur, Adv. Mr. Nilay Rai, Adv. Mr. Prince Singh, Adv. Mr. Dheeraj Sj, Adv. Mr. Tushar Mehta, Solicitor General Mr. Kanu Agarwal, Adv. Mr. Madhav Sinhal, Adv. Mr. Aaditya Dixit, Adv. Mr. R Bala, Adv. Ms. Vimla Sinha, Adv. Mr. Amrish Kumar, AOR Ms. Anitha Shenoy, Sr. Adv. Ms. Srishti Agnihotri, AOR Ms. Ayushma Awasthi, Adv. Ms. Sanjana Grace Thomas, Adv. Mr. D.p.singh, Adv. Ms. Tara Elizabeth Kurien, Adv. Mr. Kiran Javali, Sr. Adv. Mr. Joseph Pookkatt, Adv. Mr. Nilesh Sharma, Adv. Mr. Dhawesh Pahuja, Adv. Ms. Awantika Manohar, Adv. For M/s. AP & J Chambers, AOR Mr. Vikas Singh, Sr. Adv. Mr. Aman Panwar, A.A.G. Mr. V. N. Raghupathy, AOR Ms. Deepika Kalia, Adv.

5 Ms. Vasudha Singh, Adv. Mr. Sudeep Chandra, Adv. Mr. Shivansh Saxena, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R List the matter on 6-3-2025. (VISHAL ANAND) (POOJA SHARMA) ASTT. REGISTRAR-cum-PS COURT MASTER (NSH)

ITEM NO.16 REGISTRAR COURT SECTION II S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE REGISTRAR MS. SUJATA SINGH Criminal Appeal No(s). 457/2018 MANJU SURANA Appellant(s) VERSUS RATAN SINGH & ORS. Respondent(s) Date : 24-02-2025 This appeal was called on for hearing today. For Appellant(s) : Mr. Prashant Bhushan, AOR For Respondent(s) : Mr. Merusagar Samantaray, AOR Mr. Gautam Jha, AOR Mr. Nishant Ramakantrao Katneshwarkar, AOR Ms. Radhika Gupta , AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Respondent No.1 has been deleted from the array of parties vide Hon’ble Court’s order dated 27.03.2018. Respondent Nos. 2, 3 & 5 are duly represented. Service is complete on respondent Nos. 4 & 7 but none has entered appearance. Respondent No.8 has already filed counter affidavit. Ld. counsel for respondent No.6 has been designated as Senior Advocate. Two weeks’ time, as last opportunity, is granted to Ld. counsel for appellant to file fresh particulars. contd….

-2- Original records of High Court as well Trial Court have been received. Let soft copies of the same be provided to Ld. Counsels for the parties in light of Circular dated 10.1.2025. List again on 16.04.2025. SUJATA SINGH rd Registrar

ITEM NO.36 COURT NO.8 SECTION II 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). 2824- 2825/2024 [Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 21-10-2022 in CRLP No. 258/2021 17-03-2023 in IA No. 1/2023 passed by the High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad] V.D. RAJAGOPAL Petitioner(s) VERSUS THE STATE OF TELANGANA Respondent(s) IA No. 157096/2023 - CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING IA No. 157097/2023 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT Date : 24-02-2025 This matter was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M. SUNDRESH HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL For Petitioner(s) Mr. S. Nagamuthu, Sr. Adv. (NP) Mr. Sushil Kumar Gupta, Adv. Ms. Sunita Gupta, Adv. Ms. Ipshita Gupta, Adv. Mr. Manan Verma, AOR Mr. Sumit Kumar, Adv. Mr. Shubham Arora, Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Vikramjeet Banerjee, A.S.G. (NP) Mr. Arijit Prasad, Sr. Adv. Mr. Mukesh Kumar Maroria, AOR Ms. Shraddha Deshmukh, Adv. Ms. Aakanksha Kaul, Adv. Mr. Raghav Sharma, Adv. Mr. Shantnu Sharma, Adv. Mr. V V V Pattabhi Ram, Adv. Mr. Vivek Gupta, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R At the request of the learned counsel for the petitioner, list the matters on 23.04.2025 (NMD). (SWETA BALODI) (POONAM VAID) ASTT. REGISTRAR-cum-PS ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

-1- ITEM NO.13 REGISTRAR COURT SECTION II S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE REGISTRAR MS. SUJATA SINGH Criminal Appeal No(s). 457/2018 MANJU SURANA Appellant(s) VERSUS RATAN SINGH & ORS. Respondent(s) Date : 21-01-2025 This appeal was called on for hearing today. For Appellant(s) : Mr. Prashant Bhushan, AOR Mr. Rahul Gupta, Adv. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Merusagar Samantaray, AOR Mr. Gautam Jha, AOR Mr. Nishant Ramakantrao Katneshwarkar, AOR Ms. Radhika Gupta , AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Respondent no.1 has been deleted vide Hon’ble Court's order dated 27.03.2018. Respondent nos.2, 3, 5 and 8 are Duly represented. Counter Affidavit, if any, be filed within four weeks. Service is complete on respondent nos.4 and 7, but none has entered appearance. Earlier Ld. Counsel for respondent no.6 has been designated as Senior Advocate. Service alternative arrangement notice is not complete due to remarks "Addressee has been retired, hence, returned". Two weeks time, is granted to Ld. counsel for the

-2- appellant to take fresh steps and to file fresh particulars for service on respondent no.6. Original records of High Court and Trial Court have been received. List again on 24.02.2025. SUJATA SINGH Registrar pm

1 ITEM NO.306 + 307 + 308 + 309 COURT NO.14 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).520/2021 [Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 05-01-2021 in CRLP No.9361/2016 passed by the High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru] B.S YEDDIYURAPPA Petitioner(s) VERSUS A ALAM PASHA & ORS. Respondent(s) (IA No. 13491/2021 - INTERVENTION APPLICATION IA No. 13494/2021 - PERMISSION TO APPEAR AND ARGUE IN PERSON) WITH SLP(Crl) No.758/2021 (II-C) (IA No.10975/2021 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES) SLP(Crl) No.2318/2021 (II-C) (IA No.37670/2021 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT IA No. 37664/2021 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES) SLP(Crl) Nos.2771-2773/2021 (II-C) (IA No. 45642/2021 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT IA No. 276003/2024 - WITHDRAWAL OF CASE / APPLICATION) SLP(Crl) No.2753/2021 (II-C) (IA No. 35851/2023 - APPLICATION FOR MODIFICATION OF PARTY DETAILS / CHALLENGED JUDGEMENT DETAILS IA No. 46546/2021 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. IA No. 46543/2021 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES)

2 SLP(Crl) No. 3372/2021 (II-C) (IA No. 56807/2021 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT IA No. 56808/2021 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T.) SLP (Crl.) No.9361/2021 (IA No. 51957/2022 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 157936/2021 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES) SLP (Crl.) No.8675/2022 (IA No. 138597/2022 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. IA No. 138595/2022 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES) SLP (Crl.) Nos.5333-5347/2016 (IA No. 119882/2017 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES IA No. 11524/2016 - PERMISSION TO FILE ANNEXURES) Date : 17-01-2025 These matters were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.B. PARDIWALA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ MISRA For Petitioner(s) Ms. Anitha Shenoy, Sr. Adv. Ms. Srishti Agnihotri, AOR Ms. Ayushma Awasthi, Adv. Ms. Himanshi Gupta, Adv. Ms. Sanjana Grace Thomas, Adv. Mr. D.P. Singh, Adv. Ms. Tara Elizabeth Kurien, Adv. Mr. Sajan Poovayya, Sr. Adv. Mr. Mahesh Agarwal, Adv. Mr. Ankur Saigal, Adv. Mr. Ankit Agarwal, Adv. Ms. Kajal Dalal, Adv. Ms. Sanjanthi Sajan Poovayya, Adv. Mr. Uday Aditya Jetley Pocha, Adv. Mr. Palash Maheshwari, Adv. Ms. Sneha Dey, Adv. Mr. Harshvardhan Sharma, Adv. Mr. E. C. Agrawala, AOR

3 Mr. Siddharth Luthra, Sr. Adv. Mr. Siddharth Dave, Sr. Adv. Mr. Sandeep Patil, Adv. Mr. Kush Chaturvedi, AOR Mr. Shubhranshu Padhi, Adv. Ms. Prerna Priyadarshini, Adv. Mr. Syed Faraz Alam, Adv. Mr. Atharva Gaur, Adv. Mr. Aayushman Aggarwal, Adv. Mr. Shaurya Gupta, Adv. Mr. Anmol Kheta, Adv. Mr. Sohail Ahmed, Adv. Mr. Sahir Seth, Adv. Mr. Nakul Chengappa, Adv. Mr. Himanshu Tyagi, Adv. Mr. Jay Nirupam, Adv. Mr. D. Girish Kumar, Adv. Mr. Pranav Giri, Adv. Mr. Ekansh Sisodia, Adv. Mr. Kiran S. Javali, Sr. Adv. Mr. Joseph Pookkatt, Adv. Mr. Nilesh Sharma, Adv. Ms. Awantika Manohar, Adv. Mr. Dhawesh Pahuja, Adv. For M/S. AP & J Chambers, AOR Mr. Prateek Chadha, A.A.G. Mr. D. L. Chidananda, AOR For Respondent(s) Mr. A. P. Mohanty, AOR Mr. Sajan Poovayya, Sr. Adv. Mr. Mahesh Agarwal, Adv. Mr. Ankur Saigal, Adv. Mr. Ankit Agarwal, Adv. Ms. Kajal Dalal, Adv. Ms. Sanjanthi Sajan Poovayya, Adv. Mr. Uday Aditya Jetley Pocha, Adv. Mr. Palash Maheshwari, Adv. Ms. Sneha Dey, Adv. Mr. Harshvardhan Sharma, Adv. Mr. E. C. Agrawala, AOR Ms. Anitha Shenoy, Sr. Adv. Ms. Srishti Agnihotri, AOR Ms. Ayushma Awasthi, Adv. Ms. Himanshi Gupta, Adv. Ms. Sanjana Grace Thomas, Adv.

4 Mr. D.P. Singh, Adv. Ms. Tara Elizabeth Kurien, Adv. Mr. Kiran S. Javali, Sr. Adv. Mr. Joseph Pookkatt, Adv. Mr. Nilesh Sharma, Adv. Ms. Awantika Manohar, Adv. Mr. Dhawesh Pahuja, Adv. For M/S. AP & J Chambers, AOR Mr. Vikas Singh, Sr. Adv. Mr. Aman Panwar, AAG Mr. Prateek K. Chadha, AAG Mr. V. N. Raghupathy, AOR Mr. Sreekar Aechuri, Adv. Mr. Shivansh Saxena, Adv. Mr. K.V. Dhananjay, Adv. Mr. A. Velan, AOR Mr. Pawan Shyam, Adv. Ms. Navpreet Kaur, Adv. Mr. Dheeraj S.J., Adv. Mr. Nilay Rai, Adv. Mr. Prince Singh, Adv. Mr. Vikas Upadhyay, AOR Mr. Ashwin Kumar Nair, Adv. Ms. Ankita Kashyap, Adv. Mr. Gaurav G. K., Adv. Mr. Gopalakrishna, Adv. Ms. Sneha Abraham, Adv. Mr. Arjun Singh Tomar, Adv. Mr. Wazid Hasan, Adv. Mr. Tushar Mehta, Solicitor General Mr. Kanu Agrawal, Adv. Mr. Madhav Sinhal, Adv. Mr. Aaditya Dixit, Adv. Mr. R. Bala, Adv. Mr. Vimla Sinha, Adv. Mr. Amrish Kumar, AOR Ms. Anil Katiyar, AOR

5 UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R SLP(Crl.) No.520/2021, SLP(Crl) No.758/2021, SLP(Crl) No.2318/2021, SLP(Crl) No.2753/2021, SLP(Crl) No. 3372/2021, SLP (Crl.) No.9361/2021, SLP (Crl.) No.8675/2022 and SLP (Crl.) Nos.5333- 5347/2016 List these matters on 28.02.2025. SLP(Crl) Nos.2771-2773/2021 I.A. No.276003 of 2024 (Application for withdrawal of case) is allowed. Accordingly, these special leave petitions are dismissed. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of. (SAPNA BISHT) (POOJA SHARMA) COURT MASTER (SH) COURT MASTER (NSH)

ITEM NO.1711 COURT NO.8 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 Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No(s). 520/2021 B.S YEDDIYURAPPA Petitioner(s) VERSUS A ALAM PASHA & ORS. Respondent(s) (ONLY SLP(Crl) No. 758/2021 is LISTED UNDER THIS ITEM ] ) WITH SLP(Crl) No. 758/2021 (II-C) Date : 06-12-2024 This petition was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NONGMEIKAPAM KOTISWAR SINGH [IN CHAMBERS] For Petitioner(s) Ms. Neha Agarwal, Adv. Mr. E. C. Agrawala, AOR Mr. Kush Chaturvedi, AOR For Respondent(s) Mr. A. P. Mohanty, AOR Ms. Neha Agarwal, Adv. Mr. E. C. Agrawala, AOR Ms. Srishti Agnihotri, AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Learned counsel for the petitioner prays for and is granted two weeks time for filing spare copies. List the matter after two weeks. (KANCHAN CHOUHAN) (VEENA RANI NAGPAL) SENIOR PERSONAL ASSISTANT COURT MASTER(NSH)

ITEM NO.47 COURT NO.4 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). 8675/2022 [Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 07-09-2022 in CRLP No. 5659/2021 passed by the High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru] B.S. YEDIYURAPPA Petitioner(s) VERSUS ABRAHAM T.J. & ORS. Respondent(s) (IA No. 138597/2022 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. IA No. 138595/2022 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ ANNEXURES) Date : 29-11-2024 This matter was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HRISHIKESH ROY HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.V.N. BHATTI For Petitioner(s) Mr. Sidharth Luthra, Sr. Adv. Mr. Siddharth Dave, Sr. Adv. Mr. Sandeep Patil, Adv. Mr. Shubhranshu Padhi, Adv. Mr. Kush Chaturvedi, AOR Ms. Prerna Priyadarshini, Adv. Mr. Syed Faraz Alam, Adv. Mr. Atharva Gaur, Adv. Mr. Aayushman Aggarwal, Adv. Mr. Shaurya Gupta, Adv. Mr. Jay Nirupam, Adv. Mr. D. Girish Kumar, Adv. Mr. Pranav Giri, Adv. Ms. A. M. Harsavardhini, Adv. Mr. Ekansh Sisodia, Adv. Mr. Anmol Kheta, Adv. Ms. Anshala Varma, Adv. Mr. Kwan Jaggi, Adv. Mr. Nakul Chengappa, Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Vikas Upadhyay, AOR Mr. Ashwin Kumar Nair, Adv. Mrs. Ankita Kashyap, Adv. Mr. Gaurav Gk, Adv. Mr. Gopalakrishna, Adv. Ms. Sneha Abraham, Adv. Mr. Arjun Singh Tomar, Adv. 1

Mr. Vikas Singh, Sr. Adv. Mr. Aman Panwar, A.A.G. Ms. Deepika Kalia, Adv. Ms. Vasudha Singh, Adv. Mr. Sudeep Chandra, Adv. Mr. V. N. Raghupathy, AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Learned counsel for the parties have drawn this Court’s attention to the order dated 23.08.2024 which indicates that the matter is part-heard before another Bench. The Registry should accordingly do the needful. (NITIN TALREJA) (KAMLESH RAWAT) ASTT. REGISTRAR-cum-PS ASSISTANT REGISTRAR 2

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).9361/2021 [Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 22-12-2020 in WP No.5043/2019 passed by the High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru] B.S. YEDDYURAPPA Petitioner(s) VERSUS THE STATE OF KARNATAKA & ANR. Respondent(s) (IA No. 51957/2022 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS, IA No.157936/2021 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES) Date : 21-11-2024 This matter was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA KANT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UJJAL BHUYAN For Petitioner(s) Mr. Sidharth Luthra, Sr. Adv. Mr. Siddharth Dave, Sr. Adv. Mr. Sandeep Patil, Adv. Mr. Shubhranshu Padhi, Adv. Mr. Kush Chaturvedi, AOR Ms. Prerna Priyadarshini, Adv. Mr. Anmol Kheta, Adv. Ms. Anshala Verma, Adv. Mr. Kwan Jaggi, Adv. Mr. Nakul Chengappa, Adv. Mr. Jay Nirupam, Adv. Mr. D. Girish Kumar, Adv. Mr. Pranav Giri, Adv. Mr. Ekansh Sisodia, Adv. Ms. A. M. Harsavardhini, Adv. Mr. Syed Faraz Alam, Adv. Mr. Atharva Gaur, Adv. Mr. Aayushman Aggarwal, Adv. Mr. Shaurya Gupta, Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Aman Panwar, A.A.G. Mr. V. N. Raghupathy, AOR Mr. K.v.dhananjay, Adv. Mr. A Velan, AOR Ms. Navpreet Kaur, Adv. Mr. Dheeraj SJ, Adv. 1

UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R At the request of learned State counsel matter is adjourned for one week. 2. Post the matter for hearing on 05.12.2024. (ARJUN BISHT) (PREETHI T.C.) ASTT. REGISTRAR-cum-PS ASSISTANT REGISTRAR 2

ITEM NO.31 REGISTRAR COURT SECTION II S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE REGISTRAR MS. SUJATA SINGH Criminal Appeal No(s). 457/2018 MANJU SURANA Appellant(s) VERSUS RATAN SINGH & ORS. Respondent(s) Date : 20-11-2024 This appeal was called on for hearing today. For Appellant(s) Mr. Prashant Bhushan, AOR Mr. Rahul Gupta, Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Merusagar Samantaray, AOR Mr. Gautam Jha, AOR Mr. Nishant Ramakantrao Katneshwarkar, AOR Ms. Radhika Gupta , AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Respondent No.1 has been deleted from the array of parties vide Hon’ble Court’s order dated 27.03.2018. Respondent Nos.2, 3, 5 and 8 are duly represented. Ld. Counsel for respondent No.6 has been designated as Senior Advocate. Re-issue notice for alternative arrangement in respect of the said respondent. Service is complete on respondent Nos.4 and 7 but none has entered appearance. Original Records from the High Court and Trial Court have been received. List again on 21.01.2025. SUJATA SINGH Registrar rd

ITEM NO.1741 COURT NO.8 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. 520/2021 B.S YEDDIYURAPPA Petitioner(s) VERSUS A ALAM PASHA & ORS. Respondent(s) [ ONLY SLP(Crl) No. 758/2021 is LISTED UNDER THIS ITEM ] SLP(Crl) No. 758/2021 (II-C) Date : 04-11-2024 SLP(Crl) No. 758/2021 was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.K. MAHESHWARI [IN CHAMBER] For Petitioner(s) Ms. Neha Agarwal, Adv. Mr. E. C. Agrawala, AOR Mr. Kush Chaturvedi, AOR For Respondent(s) Mr. A. P. Mohanty, AOR Ms. Neha Agarwal, Adv. Mr. E. C. Agrawala, AOR Mr. D. P. Singh, Adv. Ms. Srishti Agnihotri, AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R SLP(Crl) No. 758/2021 1) In view of the office report, steps are required to be taken by the petitioner for which four weeks’ further time is allowed. 2) List thereafter. (NIDHI AHUJA) (NAND KISHOR) AR-cum-PS COURT MASTER (NSH)

SLPR 8675/2022 ITEM NO.8 COURT NO.10 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.8675/2022 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 07-09-2022 in CRLP No.5659/2021 passed by the High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru) B.S. YEDIYURAPPA Petitioner(s) VERSUS ABRAHAM T.J. & ORS. Respondent(s) (With IA No.138597/2022 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. and IA No. 138595/2022 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ ANNEXURES) Date : 18-10-2024 These matters were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.B. PARDIWALA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ MISRA For Petitioner(s) Mr. Sidharth Luthra, Sr. Adv. Mr. Sidhartha Dave, Sr. Adv. Mr. Sandeep Patil, Adv. Mr. Shubhranshu Padhi, Adv. Mr. Kush Chaturvedi, AOR Ms. Prerna Priyadarshini, Adv. Mr. Syed Faraz Alam, Adv. Mr. Atharva Gaur, Adv. Mr. Aayushman Aggarwal, Adv. Mr. Jay Nirupam, Adv. Mr. D. Girish Kumar, Adv. Mr. Pranav Giri, Adv. 1

SLPR 8675/2022 Ms. A.M. Harsavardhini, Adv. Mr. Ekansh Sisodia, Adv. Mr. Anmol Kheta, Adv. Ms. Anshala Varma, Adv. Mr. Kwan Jaggi, Adv. Mr. Nakul Chengappa, Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Vikas Upadhyay, AOR Mr. Ashwin Kumar Nair, Adv. Mrs. Ankita Kashyap, Adv. Mr. Gaurav Gk, Adv. Mr. Gopalakrishna, Adv. Ms. Sneha Abraham, Adv. Mr. Arjun Singh Tomar, Adv. Mr. Aman Panwar, AAG Mr. V.N. Raghupathy, AOR Mr. Shivam Singh Baghel, Adv. Mr. Akash Panwar, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R 1 List the Special Leave Petition on a non-miscellaneous day on 12 November 2024. (CHETAN KUMAR) (SAROJ KUMARI GAUR) A.R.-cum-P.S. Assistant Registrar 2

ITEM NO.1714 COURT NO.7 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).520/2021 B.S YEDDIYURAPPA Petitioner(s) VERSUS A ALAM PASHA & ORS. Respondent(s) ([ONLY SLP(Crl) No. 758/2021 is LISTED UNDER THIS ITEM]) WITH SLP(Crl) No. 758/2021 (II-C) Date : 30-09-2024 This petition was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRASANNA B. VARALE [IN CHAMBER] For Petitioner(s) Ms. Neha Agarwal, Adv. Mr. E. C. Agrawala, AOR Mr. Kush Chaturvedi, AOR For Respondent(s) Mr. A. P. Mohanty, AOR Ms. Neha Agarwal, Adv. Mr. E. C. Agrawala, AOR Ms. Srishti Agnihotri, AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R SLP(Crl) No.758/2021 1. Learned counsel for the petitioner(s) prays for and is granted two weeks’ time to file an appropriate application seeking deletion of respondent no.3 from the array of parties. 2. List after two weeks. (ARJUN BISHT) (RAVINDER KUMAR) ASTT. REGISTRAR-cum-PS COURT MASTER (NSH)

ITEM NO.1754 COURT NO.17 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.520/2021 B.S YEDDIYURAPPA Petitioner(s) VERSUS A ALAM PASHA & ORS. Respondent(s) ([ONLY SLP(Crl) No.758/2021 is LISTED UNDER THIS ITEM]) WITH SLP(Crl) No.758/2021 (II-C) Date : 13-09-2024 This petition was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. MAHADEVAN [IN CHAMBER] For Petitioner(s) Mr. Sandeep Patil, Adv. (N.P.) Mr. Kush Chaturvedi, AOR (N.P.) Mr. Syed Faraz Alam, Adv. (N.P.) Mr. Atharva Gaur, Adv. (N.P.) Mr. Aayushman Aggarwal, Adv. (N.P.) Ms. Neha Agarwal, Adv. (N.P.) Mr. E.C. Agrawala, AOR (N.P.) For Respondent(s) Mr. A.P. Mohanty, AOR Ms. Neha Agarwal, Adv. Mr. E.C. Agrawala, AOR Ms. Srishti Agnihotri, AOR 1

UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R SLP(Crl) No.758/2021 No one has entered appearance on behalf of the petitioners. Necessary steps, as directed by the Registry, are not being taken up till date. Two weeks time is granted to do the needful. (VIJAY KUMAR) (RAM SUBHAG SINGH) COURT MASTER (SH) COURT MASTER (NSH) 2

1 ITEM NO.1753 COURT NO.10 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 for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No. 520/2021 B.S YEDDIYURAPPA Petitioner(s) VERSUS A ALAM PASHA & ORS. Respondent(s) ([ ONLY SLP(Crl) No. 758/2021, SLP(Crl) No.2771-2773/2021 & SLP(Crl) No.2753/2021 ARE LISTED UNDER THIS ITEM ] ) WITH SLP(Crl) Nos. 2771-2773/2021 (II-C) (FOR ADMISSION and I.R. and IA No.45642/2021-EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT) SLP(Crl) No. 2753/2021 (II-C) (FOR RECALLING THE COURTS ORDER ON IA 52156/2021) SLP(Crl) No. 758/2021 (II-C) Date : 29-08-2024 These matters were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.V.N. BHATTI [IN CHAMBERS] For Petitioner(s) Ms. Neha Agarwal, Adv. Mr. Ashwini Kumar, Adv. Mr. E. C. Agrawala, AOR Mr. Sandeep Patil, Adv. Mr. Kush Chaturvedi, AOR Mr. Syed Faraz Alam, Adv. Mr. Shubhranshu Padhi, Adv. Mr. Atharva Gaur, Adv. Mr. Aayushman Aggarwal, Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. A. P. Mohanty, AOR Ms. Neha Agarwal, Adv. Mr. E. C. Agrawala, AOR Ms. Srishti Agnihotri, AOR M/S. Ap & J Chambers, AOR

2 Mr. Dhawesh Pahuja, Adv. Mr. Nilesh Sharma, Adv. Ms. Awantika Manohar, Adv. Mr. V. N. Raghupathy, AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R SLP(Crl) Nos. 2771-2773/2021 and SLP(Crl) No. 2753/2021 Mr. Kush Chaturvedi, learned counsel informs that the details are furnished on 28.08.2024 in respect of the unserved respondents. The statement is placed on record. The Registry is directed to verify the same and if the said details are e-filed, as stated by the counsel, to proceed with the issuance of notice to the unserved respondents. List thereafter. SLP(Crl) No. 758/2021 There is no representation for the petitioner(s). Learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.1/Complainant states that the petitioner(s), both by choice and desire are not completing the process and are taking advantage of the interim order passed by this court. The concerned expression of the complainant is noted. For the present, default orders are deferred.

3 List after one week. (SNEHA DAS) (DIVYA BABBAR) SENIOR PERSONAL ASSISTANT COURT MASTER (NSH)

SLPR 8675/2022 ITEM NO.66 COURT NO.10 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.8675/2022 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 07-09-2022 in CRLP No.5659/2021 passed by the High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru) B.S. YEDIYURAPPA Petitioner(s) VERSUS ABRAHAM T.J. & ORS. Respondent(s) (With IA No.138597/2022 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. and IA No. 138595/2022 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ ANNEXURES) Date : 23-08-2024 These matters were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.B. PARDIWALA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ MISRA For Petitioner(s) Mr. Sidharth Luthra, Sr. Adv. Mr. Siddharth Dave, Sr. Adv. Mr. Sandeep Patil, Adv. Mr. Shubhranshu Padhi, Adv. Mr. Kush Chaturvedi, AOR Mr. Syed Faraz Alam, Adv. Mr. Atharva Gaur, Adv. Mr. Aayushman Aggarwal, Adv. Mr. Jay Nirupam, Adv. Mr. D. Girish Kumar, Adv. Mr. Pranav Giri, Adv. Mr. Ekansh Sisodia, Adv. 1

SLPR 8675/2022 Mr. Anmol Kheta, Adv. Ms. Anshala Varma, Adv. Mr. Kwan Jaggi, Adv. Mr. Nakul Chengappa, Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Vikas Upadhyay, AOR Mr. Ashwin Kumar Nair, Adv. Mrs. Ankita Kashyap, Adv. Mr. Arjun Singh Tomar, Adv. Mr. Gaurav Gk, Adv. Mr. Gopalakrishna, Adv. Ms. Sneha Abraham, Adv. Mr. Nitin Gaur, Adv. Mr. Aman Panwar, AAG Mr. V.N. Raghupathy, AOR Mr. Shivam Singh Baghel, Adv. Mr. Harsh Gattani, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R 1 List the Special Leave Petition on 18 October 2024 and be treated as a part heard matter. (CHETAN KUMAR) (SAROJ KUMARI GAUR) A.R.-cum-P.S. Assistant Registrar 2

-1- ITEM NO.38 REGISTRAR COURT. 1 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 BEFORE THE REGISTRAR MS. SUJATA SINGH Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s). 520/2021 B.S YEDDIYURAPPA Petitioner(s) VERSUS A ALAM PASHA & ORS. Respondent(s) ([ ONLY SLP(Crl) No. 758/2021, SLP(Crl) No.2771-2773/2021 & SLP(Crl) No.2753/2021 ARE LISTED UNDER THIS ITEM ] ) WITH SLP(Crl) No. 2771-2773/2021 (II-C) (FOR ADMISSION and I.R. and IA No.45642/2021-EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT) SLP(Crl) No. 2753/2021 (II-C) (FOR RECALLING THE COURTS ORDER ON IA 52156/2021) SLP(Crl) No. 758/2021 (II-C) Date : 09-07-2024 This petition was called on for hearing today. For Petitioner(s) Mr. Kush Chaturvedi, AOR Mr. Syed Faraz Alam, Adv. Mr. Atharva Gaur, Adv. Mr. Aayushman Aggarwal, Adv. Ms. Neha Agarwal, Adv. Mr. Ashwini Kumar, Adv. Mr. E. C. Agrawala, AOR For Respondent(s) Mr. A. P. Mohanty, AOR Ms. Neha Agarwal, Adv. Mr. E. C. Agrawala, AOR Ms. Srishti Agnihotri, AOR Mr. D. P. Singh, Adv. Ms. Tara Kurien, Adv. M/S. Ap & J Chambers, AOR

-2- Mr. Nilesh Sharma, Adv. Mr. Dhawesh Pahuja, Adv. Mr. V. N. Raghupathy, AOR Mr. Varun Varma, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R SLP (CRL.) NO. 758 OF 2021 Respondent nos.1 and 4 have already filed counter affidavit. Respondent no.3 is Respondent no.3 in SLP(Crl.) No.520/2021 is duly represented there. Service is complete on respondent no.2, but none has entered appearance. SLP(Crl) Nos. 2771-2773/2021 Respondent nos.1 and 12 are granted four weeks’ time for filing counter affidavit, as last opportunity. Ld. counsel for petitioner has failed to take fresh steps and furnish fresh particulars, for effecting service upon respondent nos.6 and 9, despite opportunity granted. Service is complete on the remaining respondents but none has entered appearance. SLP(Crl) No. 2753/2021 Respondent no. 1 has filed counter affidavit. Respondent nos.11 and 12 are granted four weeks’ time for filing counter affidavit, as a last opportunity. Ld. counsel for petitioner has failed to take fresh steps and furnish fresh particulars, for effecting service upon respondent nos.7 and 10, despite opportunity granted. Service is complete on the remaining respondents but none has entered appearance. Hence, process the matter for listing before the Hon’ble Judge-in-Chambers, for further directions. SUJATA SINGH Registrar

ITEM NO.3 REGISTRAR COURT. 2 SECTION II S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE REGISTRAR SH. PRADIP Y. LADEKAR Criminal Appeal No(s). 457/2018 MANJU SURANA Appellant(s) VERSUS RATAN SINGH & ORS. Respondent(s) Date : 16 - 05 - 2024 This appeal was called on for hearing today. For Appellant(s) Mr. Prashant Bhushan, AOR Mr. Rahul Gupta, Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Merusagar Samantaray, AOR Mr. Gautam Jha, AOR Mr. Nishant Ramakantrao Katneshwarkar, AOR Mr. Nachiketa Joshi, AOR Ms. Radhika Gupta, AOR Mr. Vijay Gupta, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Respondent no.1 has been deleted from the array of parties. Respondent no.8 has already filed counter affidavit. As regards respondent nos.4 and 7, proof of paper publication filed but the name s of newspaper are different. As per office report, petitioner was to file proof of publication in Rajasthan Patrika, however, Ld. Counsel for the petitioner submits that the said newspaper has refused to publish and therefore, he has published the notices in three regional newspapers, namely i) First India, ii) Dainik Bhor and iii) Divya Rashtra. According to Ld.

- 2 - Counsel for the petitioner these newspapers are widely circulated in the area of residence of the said respondent. Hence, service is complete Service is complete on other respondents. Hence, process the matter for listing before the Hon’ble Court, as per rules. PRADIP Y. LADEKAR Registrar

1 ITEM NO.16 COURT NO.13 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). 3567- 3568/2017 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 09-10-2015 in WPCRL No. 4765/2014 09-10-2015 in WPCRL No. 4766/2014 passed by the High Court Of Judicature At Bombay) SHAMIM KHAN Petitioner(s) VERSUS DEBASHISH CHAKRABARTY & ORS. Respondent(s) (IA No. 6532/2017 - CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING) WITH SLP(Crl) No. 4606/2017 (II-A) SLP(Crl) No. 4608/2017 (II-A) SLP(Crl) No. 4607/2017 (II-A) Date : 16-04-2024 These petitions were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.T. RAVIKUMAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL For Petitioner(s) Mr. Sanjay Parikh, Sr. Adv. Mr. Raj Awasthi, Adv. Mr. Pukhrambam Ramesh Kumar, AOR Mr. Karun Sharma, Adv. Ms. Anupama Ngangom, Adv. Ms. Rajkumari Divyasana, Adv. Ms. Maulshree Pathak, Adv. Ms. Meenakshi Vimal, Adv. Mr. V. Madhukar, Adv. Mr. Mohit D. Ram, AOR Ms. Monisha Handa, Adv. Mr. Rajul Shrivastav, Adv. Mr. Anubhav Sharma, Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Sanjay Kharde, Sr. Adv. Mr. Satyajit Kharde, Adv. Mr. Abhishek Mane, Adv. Mr. Sunil Kumar Sethi, Adv. Mr. Kailas Bajirao Autade, AOR

2 Mr. Sanjay Kharde, Sr. Adv. Mr. Satyajeet Kharde, Adv. Mr. Sunil Kumar Verma, AOR M/S. J S Wad And Co, AOR Mr. Ashish Wad, Adv. Mrs. Tamali Wad, Adv. Mr. Ajeyo Sharma, Adv. Ms. Akriti Arya, Adv. Mr. Samrat Krishnarao Shinde, Adv. Mr. Siddharth Dharmadhikari, Adv. Mr. Aaditya Aniruddha Pande, AOR Mr. Bharat Bagla, Adv. Mr. Sourav Singh, Adv. Mr. Aditya Krishna, Adv. Ms. Preet S. Phanse, Adv. Mr. Adarsh Dubey, Adv. Mr. Abhishek Bharti, Adv. Mr. Santosh Pathak, Adv. Mr. Purva Naik, Adv. Ms. Aarti Mahto, Adv. Mr. Balaji Srinivasan, AOR Mr. P. N. Puri, AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Heard learned counsel on both sides. Upon hearing the learned counsel and on perusing the materials on record, we find that the question which was already referred to a larger Bench, as per the judgment in “ Manju Surana vs. Sunil Arora & Ors. ” (2018) 5 SCC 557, is involved in this case as well. The question referred under the judgment in Manju Surana’s case (supra) is whether, while directing an investigation in terms of provisions under Section 156(3) of the CrPC, the Magistrate is applying his mind. In other words, whether the Magistrate takes ‘cognizance at that stage’.

3 We are of the considered view that scanning of the provisions under Sections 156(3), 173(2), 190, 200, 202, 203 and 204 of the CrPC would, prima facie , reveal that while directing for an investigation and forwarding the complaint therefor, the Magistrate is not actually taking cognizance. However, since the said question is referred as per the above judgment, judicial discipline and propriety dissuade us from proceeding further with the case and hence, we order to tag the captioned matters also along with the matter(s) already referred. Ordered accordingly. The judgment in Manju Surana (supra) would reveal that the matters were referred to larger Bench on 27.3.2018. Considering the fact that question involved is a matter of relevance and such issues arises frequently for consideration before Courts, we are of the considered view that an earlier decision on the question referred is solicited. Registry is directed to place these matters before the Hon’ble the Chief Justice of India for appropriate orders. (DR. NAVEEN RAWAL) (POOJA SHARMA) DY. REGISTRAR COURT MASTER (NSH)

ITEM NO.27 REGISTRAR COURT. 1 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 BEFORE THE REGISTRAR MS. APARNA AJITSARIA Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s). 520/2021 B.S YEDDIYURAPPA Petitioner(s) VERSUS A ALAM PASHA & ORS. Respondent(s) WITH SLP(Crl) No. 3372/2021 (II-C) ) SLP(Crl) No. 2318/2021 (II-C) (FOR ADMISSION and I.R. and IA No.37670/2021-EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT and IA No.37664/2021-PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES) SLP(Crl) No. 2771-2773/2021 (II-C) (FOR ADMISSION and I.R. and IA No.45642/2021-EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT) SLP(Crl) No. 2753/2021 (II-C) (FOR FOR RECALLING THE COURTS ORDER ON IA 52156/2021) Date : 05-04-2024 This petition was called on for hearing today. For Petitioner(s) M/S. Ap & J Chambers, AOR Mr. Dhawesh Pahuja, Adv. Mr D.P.Singh, Adv. Ms Tara Elizabeth Kurien, Adv. Ms. Srishti Agnihotri, AOR Mr. Kush Chaturvedi, AOR Mr Syed Faraz Alam, Adv. Mr Atharv Gaur, Adv. Mr Aayushman Aggarwal, Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. A. P. Mohanty, AOR Ms. Neha Agarwal, Adv. Mr. E. C. Agrawala, AOR Contd….

-2- Item no.27 Mr D.P.Singh, Adv. Ms Tara Elizabeth Kurien, Adv. Ms. Srishti Agnihotri, AOR M/S. Ap & J Chambers, AOR Mr. Joseph Pookkatt, Adv. Mr. Nilesh Sharma, Adv. Mr. V. N. Raghupathy, AOR Mr. Manendra Pal Gupta, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R SLP(Crl) No.520/2021 Respondent nos.1 and 4 have filed counter affidavit. Respondent no.2 is petitioner in connected matters SLP(Crl) No.758/2021, as such, service shall be deemed to be complete. Respondent no.3 is granted four weeks’ time for filing counter affidavit. SLP(Crl) No. 3372/2021 Respondent nos. 12 and 13 have filed counter affidavit. Respondent nos. 7,8 and 10 have been deleted from the array of parties vide Hon’ble Judge in Chambers order dt. 21.11.2023. Service is complete on the remaining respondents but none has entered appearance. SLP(Crl) No. 2318/2021 Respondent no.1 has filed counter affidavit. Service is complete on respondent nos. 2 to 4 but none has entered appearance. Ld. Counsel for the petitioner has filed rejoinder affidavit. Contd….

-3- Item no.27 SLP(Crl) No. 2771-2773/2021 Respondent no.12 is granted four weeks’ time for filing counter affidavit. Ld. counsel for the petitioner is granted two weeks' time as final opportunity to take fresh steps in respect of unserved respondent nos.6 and 9. Service is complete on the remaining respondents but none has entered appearance. SLP(Crl) No. 2753/2021 Respondent no. 1 has filed counter affidavit. Respondent nos.11 and 12 are granted four weeks’ time for filing counter affidavit. Ld. counsel for the petitioner is granted two weeks' time as final opportunity to take fresh steps in respect of unserved respondent nos.7 and 10. Service is complete on the remaining respondents but none has entered appearance. List again on 9.7.2024. APARNA AJITSARIA Registrar

ITEM NO.65 COURT NO.13 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). 3567- 3568/2017 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 09-10-2015 in WPCRL No. 4765/2014 09-10-2015 in WPCRL No. 4766/2014 passed by the High Court Of Judicature At Bombay) SHAMIM KHAN Petitioner(s) VERSUS DEBASHISH CHAKRABARTY & ORS. Respondent(s) IA No. 6532/2017 - CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING) WITH SLP(Crl) No. 4606/2017 (II-A) SLP(Crl) No. 4608/2017 (II-A) SLP(Crl) No. 4607/2017 (II-A) Date : 29-01-2024 These petitions were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.T. RAVIKUMAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL For Petitioner(s) Mr. Sanjay Parikh, Sr. Adv. Mr. Raj Awasthi, Adv. Mr. Pukhrambam Ramesh Kumar, AOR Mr. Karun Sharma, Adv. Ms. Rajkumaridivyasana, Adv. Mr. R.rajaselvan, Adv. Mr. V. Madhukar, Adv. Mr. Mohit D. Ram, AOR Ms. Monisha Handa, Adv. Mr. Rajul Shrivastav, Adv. Mr. Anubhav Sharma, Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Sanjay Kharde, Sr. Adv. Mr. Satyajeet Kharde, Adv. Mr. Sunil Kumar Verma, AOR M/S. J S Wad And Co, AOR Mr. Shekhar Naphade, Sr. Adv. Mr. Ashish Wad, Adv. Mrs. Tamali Wad, Adv. Mr. Ajeyo Sharma, Adv. Ms. Kirti Sharma, Adv. Ms. Akriti Arya, Adv. Ms. Farah Hashmi, Adv.

Mr. Sanjay Kharde, Sr. Adv. Mr. Satyajeet Kharde, Adv. Mr. Kailas Bajirao Autade, AOR Mr. Samrat Krishnarao Shinde, Adv. Mr. Siddharth Dharmadhikari, Adv. Mr. Aaditya Aniruddha Pande, AOR Mr. Bharat Bagla, Adv. Mr. Sourav Singh, Adv. Mr. Aditya Krishna, Adv. Ms. Raavi Sharma, Adv. Mr. Abhishek Bharti, Adv. Mr. Santosh Pathak, Adv. Ms. Aarti Mahto, Adv. Mr. Balaji Srinivasan, AOR Mr. P. N. Puri, AOR Mr. Akshat Vachher, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R List on 16.4.2024. Since these matters are of the year 2017, it is made clear that no further adjournment will be granted. (DR. NAVEEN RAWAL) (MATHEW ABRAHAM) ASTT. REGISTRAR-cum-PS COURT MASTER (NSH)

ITEM NO.3 REGISTRAR COURT. 2 SECTION II S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE REGISTRAR SH. MAHESH TANAJIRAO PATANKAR Criminal Appeal No(s). 457/2018 MANJU SURANA Appellant(s) VERSUS RATAN SINGH & ORS. Respondent(s) (Only Crl. A. No. 457 of 2018 is to be listed ) Date : 11 - 01 - 2024 This appeal was called on for hearing today. For Appellant(s) Mr. Prashant Bhushan, AOR Mr. Rahul Gupta, Adv. Mr. Luma Kant Bhandari, Adv. Mr. Debadutta Kanungo, Adv. Ms. Nisha Tiwari,Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Merusagar Samantaray, AOR Mr. Gautam Jha, AOR Mr. Nishant Ramakantrao Katneshwarkar, AOR Mr. Nachiketa Joshi, AOR Ms. Radhika Gupta, AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Respondent No.1 has been deleted from the array of parties. Respondent No.8 has already filed the counter affidavit. As requested one week’s time is granted to Ld. Counsel for appellant to file proof of service of publication in respect of Respondent Nos.4 and 7. Records have already been received. Service is complete on other respondents. List again on 27.2.2024. MAHESH TANAJIRAO PATANKAR Registrar MG

ITEM NO.1718 COURT NO.5 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). 520/2021 B.S YEDDIYURAPPA Petitioner(s) VERSUS A ALAM PASHA & ORS. Respondent(s) (ONLY SLP(Crl) No. 3372/2021 IS LISTED ) WITH SLP(Crl) No. 3372/2021 (II-C) Date : 24-11-2023 This petition was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DIPANKAR DATTA [IN CHAMBER] For Petitioner(s) M/S. AP & J Chambers, AOR Mr. Nilesh Sharma, Adv. Mr. Kush Chaturvedi, AOR For Respondent(s) Mr. A. P. Mohanty, AOR Ms. Neha Agarwal, Adv. Mr. E. C. Agrawala, AOR Ms. Srishti Agnihotri, AOR Mr. V. N. Raghupathy, AOR Mr. Manendra Pal Gupta, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R 1. Application for deletion of respondents 7, 8 and 10 from the array of respondents in SLP (Crl.) No. 3372/2021 is allowed at the risk and responsibility of the petitioner. 2. IA No. 164745 of 2023 stands allowed in the aforesaid terms. 3. Liberty is granted to the learned counsel for the petitioner to file amended memo of parties within a week from date. (KAPIL TANDON) (AMITA PANDEY) COURT MASTER (SH) COURT MASTER (NSH)

ITEM NO.4 REGISTRAR COURT. 2 SECTION II S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE REGISTRAR SH. VIVEK SAXENA IA 190187/2023, in Criminal Appeal No(s). 457/2018 MANJU SURANA Appellant(s) VERSUS RATAN SINGH & ORS. Respondent(s) (only I.A. No. 190187/2023 (Application for substitution in Crl. A. No. 457/2018 is to be listed. IA No. 190187/2023 - APPLICATION FOR SUBSTITUTION) Date : 06-11-2023 These matters were called on for hearing today. For Appellant(s) Mr. Prashant Bhushan, AOR Mr. Rahul Gupta, Adv. Mr. Luma Kanta Bhandari, Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Merusagar Samantaray, AOR Mr. Gautam Jha, AOR Mr. Nishant Ramakantrao Katneshwarkar, AOR Mr. Nachiketa Joshi, AOR Ms. Radhika Gupta, AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Respondent No.1 has been deleted from the array of parties. Respondent No. 8 has already filed the counter affidavit. Ld. Counsel for petitioner has filed application for substituted service through publication (IA No. 190187/2023) in respect of respondent nos. 4 and 7. The same is allowed. Registry to proceed further. Service is complete on other respondents. List again on 11.1.2024. VIVEK SAXENA Registrar

SLPR 8675/2022 ITEM NO.3 COURT NO.1 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.8675/2022 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 07-09-2022 in CRLP No.5659/2021 passed by the High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru) B.S. YEDIYURAPPA Petitioner(s) VERSUS ABRAHAM T.J. & ORS. Respondent(s) (With IA No.138597/2022 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. and IA No. 138595/2022 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ ANNEXURES) Date : 10-10-2023 These matters were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.B. PARDIWALA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ MISRA For Petitioner(s) Mr. Sidharth Luthra, Sr. Adv. Mr. Siddharth Dave, Sr. Adv. Mr. Sandeep Patil, Adv. Mr. Shubhranshu Padhi, Adv. Mr. Kush Chaturvedi, AOR Mr. Syed Faraz Alam, Adv. Mr. Atharva Gaur, Adv. Mr. Aayushman Aggarwal, Adv. Mr. Niroop Sukirthy, Adv. Ms. Rajeshwari Shekhar, Adv. Page 1 of 2

SLPR 8675/2022 Mr. Jay Nirupam, Adv. Mr. D. Girish Kumar, Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Vikas Upadhyay, AOR Mr. Ashwin Kumar Nair, Adv. Mr. Gaurav Gk, Adv. Mr. Gopalakrishna, Adv. Ms. Sneha Abraham, Adv. Mr. Arjun Singh Tomar, Adv. Mr. Ankita Kashyap, Adv. Mr. Aman Panwar, A.A.G. Mr. V.N. Raghupathy, AOR Mr. Manendra Pal Gupta, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R 1 List the Special Leave Petition on 31 October 2023. (CHETAN KUMAR) (SAROJ KUMARI GAUR) A.R.-cum-P.S. Assistant Registrar Page 2 of 2

1 ITEM NO.40 COURT NO.13 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). 3567- 3568/2017 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 09-10-2015 in WPCRL No. 4765/2014 09-10-2015 in WPCRL No. 4766/2014 passed by the High Court Of Judicature At Bombay) SHAMIM KHAN Petitioner(s) VERSUS DEBASHISH CHAKRABARTY & ORS. Respondent(s) IA No. 6532/2017 - CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING) WITH SLP(Crl) No. 4606/2017 (II-A) SLP(Crl) No. 4608/2017 (II-A) SLP(Crl) No. 4607/2017 (II-A) (FOR) Date : 04-09-2023 These matters were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.T. RAVIKUMAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHANSHU DHULIA For Petitioner(s) Mr. Sanjay Parikh, Sr. Adv. Mr. Pukhrambam Ramesh Kumar, AOR Mr. Karun Shrama, Adv. Mr. V.Madhukar, Adv. Mr. V. Madhukar, Adv. Mr. Mohit D. Ram, AOR Mr. Bhagirath N.patel, Adv. Ms. Monisha Handa, Adv. Mr. Rajul Shrivastav, Adv. Mr. Anubhav Sharma, Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Uday B. Dube, AOR M/S. J S Wad And Co, AOR Mr. Shekhar Naphade, Sr. Adv. Mr. Ashish Wad, Adv. Mrs. Tamali Wad, Adv. Mr. Ajeyo Sharma, Adv. Ms. Farah Hashmi, Adv.

2 Ms. Kirti Sharma, Adv. Mr. Sanjay Kharde, Adv. Mr. Satyajeet Kharde, Adv. Mr. Kailas Bajirao Autade, AOR Mr. Siddharth Dharmadhikari, Adv. Mr. Aaditya Aniruddha Pande, AOR Mr. Bharat Bagla, Adv. Mr. Sourav Singh, Adv. Mr. Aditya Krishna, Adv. Ms. Yamini Singh, Adv. Mr. Anoop Raj, Adv. Mr. P. N. Puri, AOR Mr. Aman Vachhar, Adv. Mr. Dhiraj, Adv. Mr. Ashutosh Dubey, Adv. Mrs. Anshu Vachher, Adv. Ms. Abhiti Vachher, Adv. Mr. Akshat Vachher, Adv. Mr. Amit Kumar, Adv. Mr. Balaji Srinivasan, AOR Mr. Abhishek Bharti, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R It is submitted by learned counsel for the respondent that respondent no.1 in SLP(Crl) No. 4607/2017 has died on 23.4.2021. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner seeks two weeks time to take appropriate steps. List all the matters after three weeks. (DR. NAVEEN RAWAL) (MATHEW ABRAHAM) ASTT. REGISTRAR-cum-PS COURT MASTER (NSH)

ITEM NO.5 REGISTRAR COURT. 2 SECTION II S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE REGISTRAR SH. VIVEK SAXENA Criminal Appeal No(s). 457/2018 MANJU SURANA Appellant(s) VERSUS RATAN SINGH & ORS. Respondent(s) WITH Crl.A. No. 1832/2023 (II-C) IA No. 138102/2019 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 52398/2019 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT IA No. 9545/2020 – INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT) Crl.A. No. 1823-1826/2023 (II-C) (FOR PERMISSION TO FILE PETITION (SLP/TP/WP/..) ON IA 47820/2020 FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING ON IA 47821/2020 FOR EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT ON IA 47822/2020 IA No. 47821/2020 - CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING IA No. 47822/2020 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT IA No. 47820/2020 - PERMISSION TO FILE PETITION (SLP/TP/WP/..)) Date : 04-09-2023 This appeal was called on for hearing today. For Appellant(s) Mr. Prashant Bhushan, AOR Mr. Rahul Gupta, Adv. Mr. Rishi Malhotra, AOR Mr. Mukesh Kumar Maroria, AOR For Respondent(s) Mrs. Seema Patanaha, Adv. Mr. Arvind Kumar Sharma, AOR Mr. Rishi Malhotra, AOR Mr. Merusagar Samantaray, AOR Mr. Gautam Jha, AOR Mr. Nishant Ramakantrao Katneshwarkar, AOR Mr. Nachiketa Joshi, AOR Ms. Radhika Gupta , AOR Ms. Radhika Gupta, Adv.

Ms. Neha Agarwal, Adv. Mr. E. C. Agrawala, AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Crl. A. No. 457 OF 2018 Records have been received. Respondent no.1 has been deleted from the array of parties. Respondent no.8 has already filed counter affidavit. Await certificate of service in respect of respondent nos.4 and 7. Counsel for appellant submit that they wish to effect service on said respondents through paper publication. Two weeks time, is granted to file the application for substituted service. Service is already complete in respect of other respondents. List again on 01.11.2023. Crl. A. Nos.1832, 1823-1826/2023 Service is complete in respect of all the respondents. Records of the case are not required to be requisitioned in terms of Order XX Rule 5(3) of Supreme Court Rules, 1961, since the appeal does not involve sentence of death or imprisonment for life. Four weeks time is granted to the counsel for appearing parties, to file additional documents, if any. After expiry of said period, matters be processed for listing before the Hon'ble Court, as per the rules. VIVEK SAXENA Registrar pm

ITEM NO.26 COURT NO.4 SECTION II 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. 26507/2023 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 21-10-2022 in CRLP No. 258/2021 17-03-2023 in IA No. 1/2023 passed by the High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad) V.D. RAJAGOPAL Petitioner(s) VERSUS THE STATE OF TELANGANA Respondent(s) (FOR ADMISSION and I.R. and IA No.157096/2023-CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING and IA No.157097/2023-EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT ) WITH Diary No(s). 30409/2023 (II) (FOR ADMISSION and I.R. and IA No.159321/2023-CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING and IA No.159322/2023-EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT) Date : 22-08-2023 This petition was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. BOPANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.V.N. BHATTI For Petitioner(s) Mr. Suryaprakash V Raju, A.S.G. Mr. Madhav Sinhal, Adv. Mr. Annam Venkataesh, Adv. Mr. Zoheb Hussain, Adv. Ms. Sairica S Raju, Adv. Mr. Arvind Kumar Sharma, AOR Dr. Sushil Kumar Gupta, Adv. Mrs. Sunita Gupta, Adv. Mr. Ankit Shah, Adv. Mr. Manan Verma, AOR For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Diary No. 26507/2023 Tag alongwith SLP (Crl.)NO. 2194/2019. Diary No. 30409/2023 Delay condoned. Issue notice. Tag with SLP (Crl.)No. 7621 of 2016. (RAJNI MUKHI) (DIPTI KHURANA) COURT MASTER (SH) ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

ITEM NO.1716 COURT NO.8 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). 520/2021 B.S YEDDIYURAPPA Petitioner(s) VERSUS A ALAM PASHA & ORS. Respondent(s) (ONLY SLP(Crl) No. 3372/2021 IS LISTED ) WITH SLP(Crl) No. 3372/2021 (II-C) Date : 11-08-2023 This petition was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARAVIND KUMAR [IN CHAMBER] For Petitioner(s) M/S. Ap & J Chambers, AOR Mr. Nilesh Sharma, Adv. Mr. Dhawesh Pahuji, Adv. Mr. Kush Chaturvedi, AOR For Respondent(s) Mr. A. P. Mohanty, AOR Ms. Neha Agarwal, Adv. Mr. E. C. Agrawala, AOR Ms. Srishti Agnihotri, AOR Mr. V. N. Raghupathy, AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R At request of the learned counsel for the petitioner, a week’s time is granted finally. (SHUBHAM YADAV) (AMITA PANDEY) SENIOR PERSONAL ASSISTANT BRANCH OFFICER

ITEM NO.20 REGISTRAR COURT. 1 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 BEFORE THE REGISTRAR SH. H. SHASHIDHARA SHETTY Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s). 520/2021 B.S YEDDIYURAPPA Petitioner(s) VERSUS A ALAM PASHA & ORS. Respondent(s) (ONLY SLP(Crl) No. 3372/2021 & 2753/2021 IS LISTED ) WITH SLP(Crl) No. 3372/2021 (II-C) ) SLP(Crl) No. 2753/2021 (II-C) (FOR FOR RECALLING THE COURTS ORDER ON IA 52156/2021) Date : 31-07-2023 This petition was called on for hearing today. For Petitioner(s) Mr Nilesh Sharma, Adv. Mr Dhawesh Pahuja, Adv. M/S. Ap & J Chambers, AOR Mr. Kush Chaturvedi, AOR Mr Syed Faraz Alam, Adv. Mr Atharva Gaur, Adv. Mr Aayushman Aggarwal, Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. A. P. Mohanty, AOR Ms. Neha Agarwal, Adv. Mr. E. C. Agrawala, AOR Ms. Srishti Agnihotri, AOR M/S. Ap & J Chambers, AOR Mr. V. N. Raghupathy, AOR Mr. Manendra Pal Gupta, Adv. Contd….

-2- Item no.20 UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R SLP(Crl) No. 2753/2021 Respondent no.1 has already filed counter affidavit. Respondent nos.11 and 12 are granted four weeks’ time for filing counter affidavit. Service is complete on respondent nos. 2 to 6, 8, 9, and 13 but none has entered appearance. Ld. counsel for the petitioner is granted two weeks' time to take fresh steps and file fresh particulars in respect of unserved respondent nos.7 & 10. SLP(Crl) No. 3372/2021 Service is complete on respondent nos. 1 to 6, 9 and 11 but none has entered appearance. Opportunity to respondent nos. 12 and 13 to file counter affidavit has already been declined. Ld. Counsel for the petitioner has neither taken fresh steps alongwith fresh particulars in respect of respondent nos.7 and 10 nor taken appropriate steps in respect of deceased respondent no.8 despite last opportunity having been granted, as such, Registry to process the matter for listing before the Hon'ble Judge in Chambers for necessary directions. H. SHASHIDHARA SHETTY Registrar

ITEM NO.5 REGISTRAR COURT. 2 SECTION II S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE REGISTRAR SH. VIVEK SAXENA Criminal Appeal No(s). 457/2018 MANJU SURANA Appellant(s) VERSUS RATAN SINGH & ORS. Respondent(s) (Only crl. A. Nos. 457 and 458 of 2018 are to be listed before Registrar Court. ) WITH Crl.A. No. 458/2018 (II) Date : 19-07-2023 This appeal was called on for hearing today. For Appellant(s) Mr. Prashant Bhushan, AOR Mr. Rahul Gupta, Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. H. D. Thanvi, Adv. Mr. Nikhil Kumar Singh, Adv. Mr. Rishi Matoliya, AOR Mr. Merusagar Samantaray, AOR Mr. Milind Kumar, AOR Mr. Gautam Jha, AOR Mr. Nishant Ramakantrao Katneshwarkar, AOR Mr. Nachiketa Joshi, AOR Ms. Radhika Gupta , AOR Ms. Radhika Gupta, Adv. Ms. Chandrika Gupta, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel through Video Conference, the Court made the following O R D E R Criminal Appeal No. 457 of 2018 Respondent no.1 has been deleted from the array of parties.

Respondent No. 8 has filed counter affidavit. Two weeks time is granted to learned counsel for appellant to take fresh steps and file fresh address of the respondent nos. 4 and 7 for issuance of NLPA. In the meantime, reminder be also send for certificate of service of respondent no.4. Service is complete on remaining respondents List on 04.09.2023. Criminal Appeal No. 458 of 2018 Sole respondent is duly represented. Records have been received from the concerned courts. Four weeks time is granted to the counsel for appearing parties to file additional documents, if any. After expiry of said period, matter be processed for listing before the Hon'ble Court, as per the rules. VIVEK SAXENA Registrar

ITEM NO.20 COURT NO.9 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). 3232/2019 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 01-11-2018 in CRLOP No. 23531/2018 passed by the High Court Of Judicature At Madras) NAMONARAYAN MEENA Petitioner(s) VERSUS STATE THROUGH THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE CBI/ACB/CHENNAI & ANR.Respondent(s) IA No. 138102/2019 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 52398/2019 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT IA No. 9545/2020 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT) WITH Diary No(s). 5152/2020 (II-C) (FOR FOR PERMISSION TO FILE PETITION (SLP/TP/WP/..) ON IA 47820/2020 FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING ON IA 47821/2020 FOR EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT ON IA 47822/2020 IA No. 47821/2020 - CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING IA No. 47822/2020 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT IA No. 47820/2020 - PERMISSION TO FILE PETITION (SLP/TP/WP/..)) Date : 06-07-2023 These matters were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARAVIND KUMAR For Petitioner(s) Mr. Rishi Malhotra, AOR Mr. Jaydip Pati, Adv. Mr. S.v. Raju, A.S.G. Mr. Mukesh Kumar Maroria, AOR Mr. Ankur Talwar, Adv. Mr. Abhishek Kumar, Adv. Ms. Sairica Raju, Adv. Mr. Padmesh Mishra, Adv. Mr. Annam Venkatesh, Adv. 1

For Respondent(s) Mr. Vikramjeet Banerjee, A.S.G. Mr. Sanjay Kumar Tyagi, Adv. Mr. Rajesh Kumar Singh, Adv. Mr. Ayush Anand, Adv. Mr. Prashant Rawat, Adv. Mr. Arvind Kumar Sharma, AOR Mr. Rishi Malhotra, AOR Mr. Jaydip Pati, Adv. Mr. E. C. Agrawala, AOR Ms. S. Lakshmi Iyer, Adv. Mr. Rajesh Kumar, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Delay condoned. Permission to file petitions granted. Leave granted. In view of “ Manju Surana vs. Sunil Arora and Others” reported in 2018 5SCC 557, where an identical issue has been referred to a higher Bench, the present case is also directed to tbe placed along with the said batch of cases (Criminal Appeal No. 457/2018). The papers of this case be placed before Hon’ble The Chief Justice of India. (HARSHITA UPPAL) (MATHEW ABRAHAM) SENIOR PERSONAL ASSISTANT COURT MASTER (NSH) 2

ITEM NO.17 REGISTRAR COURT. 1 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 BEFORE THE REGISTRAR SH. H. SHASHIDHARA SHETTY Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s). 520/2021 B.S YEDDIYURAPPA Petitioner(s) VERSUS A ALAM PASHA & ORS. Respondent(s) (ONLY SLP(Crl) No. 3372/2021 IS LISTED ) WITH SLP(Crl) No. 3372/2021 (II-C) ) Date : 16-05-2023 This petition was called on for hearing today. For Petitioner(s) Mr Saurabh S Sinha, Adv. Mr Dhawesh Pahuja, Adv. M/S. Ap & J Chambers, AOR Mr. Kush Chaturvedi, AOR For Respondent(s) Mr. A. P. Mohanty, AOR Ms. Neha Agarwal, Adv. Mr. E. C. Agrawala, AOR Ms. Sanjana Grace Thomas, Adv. Ms. Srishti Agnihotri, AOR Mr. V. N. Raghupathy, AOR Mr. Manendra Pal Gupta, Adv. Mrs. Ansha Varma, Adv. Contd….

-2- Item no.17 UPON hearing the counsel, the Court made the following O R D E R SLP(Crl) No. 3372/2021 Ld. counsel for the petitioner is granted two weeks' time as final opportunity to take fresh steps and file fresh particulars in respect of unserved respondent nos.7 and 10. Ld. Counsel for the petitioner is granted four weeks’ time as final opportunity to take appropriate steps in respect of respondent no.8(dead). Respondent nos. 12 and 13 have failed to file counter affidavit despite last opportunity having been granted, as such, further opportunity stands declined. Service is complete on respondent nos. 1-6, 9, and 11 but none has entered appearance. List again on 31.7.2023. H. SHASHIDHARA SHETTY Registrar

1 ITEM NO.44 REGISTRAR COURT. 2 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 BEFORE THE REGISTRAR SH. PAVANESH D. Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s). 520/2021 B.S YEDDIYURAPPA Petitioner(s) VERSUS A ALAM PASHA & ORS. Respondent(s) (ONLY SLP(Crl) No. 3372/2021 IS LISTED ) WITH SLP(Crl) No. 3372/2021 (II-C) Date : 28-03-2023 This petition was called on for hearing today. For Petitioner(s) Mr. Dhawesh Pahuja,Adv. Mr. Vaibhav Dwivedi,Adv. M/S. AP & J Chambers, AOR Mr. Kush Chaturvedi, AOR For Respondent(s) Mr. A. P. Mohanty, AOR Ms. Neha Agarwal, Adv. Mr. E. C. Agrawala, AOR Ms. Mantika Vohra, Adv. Ms. Srishti Agnihotri, AOR Mr. V. N. Raghupathy, AOR Mr. Manendra Pal Gupta, Adv.

2 UPON hearing the counsel through Video Conference, the Court made the following O R D E R SLP(Crl) No. 3372/2021 Despite due ser vice on respondent Nos. 1 to 6, 9 and 11 , there is no appearance. Four weeks time, is granted as a last chance to respondent Nos.12 and 13, to file counter affidavit. Two weeks time, is granted to the petitioner, to take fresh steps and file fresh particulars to issue notice to respondent Nos.7 and 10 , who are unserved and for filing application for substitution or to take appropriate steps in respect of deceased respondent No. 8. List again on 16.5.2023. PAVANESH D. Registrar MG

ITEM NO.12 COURT NO.1 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). 8675/2022 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 07-09-2022 in CRLP No. 5659/2021 passed by the High Court Of Karnataka At Bengaluru) B.S. YEDIYURAPPA Petitioner(s) VERSUS ABRAHAM T.J. & ORS. Respondent(s) (IA No. 138597/2022 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. IA No. 138595/2022 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES) Date : 21-03-2023 These matters were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PAMIDIGHANTAM SRI NARASIMHA For Petitioner(s) Mr. Siddharth Dave, Sr. Adv. Mr. Sandeep Patil, Adv. Mr. Syed Faraz Alam, Adv. Mr. Atharva Gaur, Adv. Mr. Aayushman Aggarwal, Adv. Ms. Aarushi Singh, Adv. Mr. Prastut Dalvi, Adv. Ms. Vidhi Thaker, Adv. Mr. Kush Chaturvedi, AOR For Respondent(s) Mr. Vikas Upadhyay, AOR Mr. Ashwin Kumar Nair, Adv. Mr. Gaurav Gk, Adv. Mr. Gopalakrishna, Adv. Ms. Sneha Abraham, Adv.

2 Ms. Ankita Kashyap, Adv. Mr. Nikhil Goel, A.A.G. Mr. V. N. Raghupathy, AOR Mr. Adithya Roy, Adv. Mr. Manendra Pal Gupta, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R List the Special Leave Petition on 11 April 2023. (GULSHAN KUMAR ARORA) (SAROJ KUMARI GAUR) AR-CUM-PS ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

ITEM NO.2 REGISTRAR COURT. 2 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 BEFORE THE REGISTRAR SH. PAVANESH D. Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s). 520/2021 B.S YEDDIYURAPPA Petitioner(s) VERSUS A ALAM PASHA & ORS. Respondent(s) (ONLY SLP(Crl) No. 3372/2021 IS LISTED ) WITH SLP(Crl) No. 3372/2021 (II-C) Date : 14-03-2023 This petition was called on for hearing today. For Petitioner(s) M/S. Ap & J Chambers, AOR Mr. Dhawesh Pahuja, Adv. Mr. Vaibhav Dwivedi, Adv. Mr. Kush Chaturvedi, AOR For Respondent(s) Mr. A. P. Mohanty, AOR Ms. Neha Agarwal, Adv. Mr. E. C. Agrawala, AOR Ms. Srishti Agnihotri, AOR Ms. Sanjana Grace Thomas, Adv. Ms. Mantika Vohra, Adv. Mr. V. N. Raghupathy, AOR Mr. Manendra Pal Gupta, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel through Video Conference, the Court made the following O R D E R SLP(Crl.) No. 3372/2021 Despite due service on respondent nos.1 to 6, 9 and 11, there is no appearance.

Four weeks time, is granted to respondent nos.12 and 13, to file counter affidavit. Two weeks time, is granted to the petitioner, to take fresh steps and file fresh particulars to issue notice to respondent nos.7 and 10, who are unserved and also to file death certificate or application for deletion in respect of deceased respondent no.8. List again on 28.04.2023. PAVANESH D. Registrar pm

SLP Crl 8675/2022 1 ITEM NO.24 COURT NO.1 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.8675/2022 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 07-09-2022 in CRLP No.5659/2021 passed by the High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru) B.S. YEDIYURAPPA Petitioner(s) VERSUS ABRAHAM T.J. & ORS. Respondent(s) (With IA No.138597/2022 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. and IA No. 138595/2022 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/ FACTS/ANNEXURES) Date : 20-02-2023 These matters were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PAMIDIGHANTAM SRI NARASIMHA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.B. PARDIWALA For Petitioner(s) Mr. Siddhartha Dave, Sr. Adv. Mr. Sandeep Patil, Adv. Mr. Kush Chaturvedi, AOR Mr. Syed Faraz Alam, Adv. Mr. Atharva Gaur, Adv. Ms. Aarushi Singh, Adv. Mr. Prastut Dalvi, Adv. Ms. Vidhi Thaker, Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Vikas Upadhyay, AOR Mr. Ashwin Kumar Nair, Adv.

SLP Crl 8675/2022 2 Mr. Gaurav Gk, Adv. Mr. Gopalakrishna, Adv. Ms. Sneha Abraham, Adv. Mr. Alok Tiwari, Adv. Ms. Ankita Kashyap, Adv. Mr. Nikhil Goel, A.A.G. Mr. V. N. Raghupathy, AOR Mr. Adithya Roy, Adv. Mr. Manendra Pal Gupta, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R 1 List the Special Leave Petition on a non-miscellaneous day on 21 March 2023. (CHETAN KUMAR) (SAROJ KUMARI GAUR) A.R.-cum-P.S. Assistant Registrar

ITEM NO.48 COURT NO.1 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 for Special Leave to Appeal(Crl.) No. 8675/2022 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 07-09-2022 in CRLP No. 5659/2021 passed by the High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru) B.S. YEDIYURAPPA Petitioner(s) VERSUS ABRAHAM T.J. & ORS. Respondent(s) (IA No. 138597/2022 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. IA No. 138595/2022 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES) Date : 03-02-2023 These matters were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PAMIDIGHANTAM SRI NARASIMHA For Petitioner(s) Mr. Kush Chaturvedi, AOR For Respondent(s) Mr. Vikas Upadhyay, AOR Mr. Nikhil Goel, AAG Mr. V. N. Raghupathy, AOR Mr. Manendra Pal Gupta, Adv. Mr. Adithya Roy, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R 1 List the Special Leave Petition on 20 February 2023. (MANISH ISSRANI) (SAROJ KUMARI GAUR) COURT MASTER(SH) ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

SLPR 9361/2021 1 ITEM NO.19 COURT NO.1 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.9361/2021 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 22-12-2020 in WP No.5043/2019 passed by the High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru) B.S. YEDDYURAPPA Petitioner(s) VERSUS THE STATE OF KARNATAKA & ANR. Respondent(s) (With IA No.51957/2022 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS and IA No. 157936/2021 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/ FACTS/ANNEXURES) Date : 31-01-2023 These matters were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PAMIDIGHANTAM SRI NARASIMHA For Petitioner(s) Mr. K.V. Vishwanathan, Sr. Adv. Mr. Sandeep Patil, Adv. Ms. Priyashree Sharma Ph, Adv. Mr. Navjot Singh, Adv. Mr. Syed Faraz Alam, Adv. Mr. Atharva Gaur, Adv. Mr. Kush Chaturvedi, AOR For Respondent(s) Mr. K.V. Dhananjay, Adv. Mr. Dheeraj, Adv. Mr. Manish Tiwari, Adv. Ms. Thashmitha Muthanna, Adv.

SLPR 9361/2021 2 Mr. Prashant Dixit, Adv. Mr. Vishwanath Chaturvedi, Adv. Mr. Shashi Bhushan Nagar, Adv. Mr. Sunil Ambavelil, Adv. M/s. Devasa & Co. Mr. Nikhil Goel, AAG Mr. V.N. Raghupathy, AOR Mr. Manendra Pal Gupta, Adv. Mr. Dhanesh Iesdhan, Adv. Mr. Adithya Roy, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R 1 List the Special Leave Petition on a non-miscellaneous day on 14 February 2023. (CHETAN KUMAR) (SAROJ KUMARI GAUR) A.R.-cum-P.S. Assistant Registrar

ITEM NO.52 COURT NO.8 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). 520/2021 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 05-01-2021 in CRLP No. 9361/2016 passed by the High Court Of Karnataka At Bengaluru) B.S YEDDIYURAPPA Petitioner(s) VERSUS A ALAM PASHA & ORS. Respondent(s) ([ONLY I.A. NO. 52156/2021 IN SLP(Crl) No. 2753/2021 IS LISTED UNDER THIS ITEM.] ) WITH SLP(Crl) No. 2753/2021 (II-C) (FOR RECALLING THE COURTS ORDER ON IA 52156/2021 IA No. 52156/2021 - RECALLING THE COURTS ORDER) Date : 23-01-2023 These petitions were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B.R. GAVAI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKRAM NATH For Petitioner(s) Mr. K.V. Viswanathan, Sr. Adv. Mr. Sandeep Patil, Adv. Ms. Priyashree Sharma Ph, Adv. Mr. Syed Faraz Alam, Adv. Mr. Atharva Gaur, Adv. Mr. Kush Chaturvedi, AOR For Respondent(s) Mr. Nikhil Goel, A.A.G. Mr. V. N. Raghupathy, AOR Mr. Md. Apzal Ansari, Adv. Mr. Adithya Roy, Adv. Mr. A. P. Mohanty, AOR Mr. Himanshu Dwivedi, Adv. Mr. Himanshu Dwivedi,, Adv. Mr. Samindra Kumar Tripathi, Adv. Mr. Samindra Kumar Tripathi,, Adv. Ms. Ankur Saigal, Adv. Ms. S. Lakshmi Iyer, Adv. Mr. E.C. Agrawala, AOR 1

Ms. Srishti Agnihotri, AOR Ms. Sanjana Grace Thomas, Adv. Ms. Mantika Vohra, Adv. M/S. AP & J Chambers, AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R I.A. NO. 52156/2021 IN SLP(Crl) No. 2753/2021 By the present application, the applicant has prayed that this Court should hear Mr. A.P. Mohanty, learned couns el for the petitioner in a fresh hearing of SLP(C) No.2753/2021. The order dated 05.04.2021 was passed by the Bench comprising of three Hon’ble Judges and perusal of the order sheet would reveal that Mr. A.P. Mohanty, learned counsel, as well as Ms. Vijay Lakshmi, learned counsel, were present when the order was passed. In that view of the matter, we are not inclined to entertain the present application. The I.A. is, accordingly, rejected. (NARENDRA PRASAD) (ANJU KAPOOR) ASTT. REGISTRAR-cum-PS COURT MASTER (NSH) 2

ITEM NO.805 COURT NO.8 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). 520/2021 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 05-01-2021 in CRLP No. 9361/2016 passed by the High Court Of Karnataka At Bengaluru) B.S YEDDIYURAPPA Petitioner(s) VERSUS A ALAM PASHA & ORS. Respondent(s) WITH SLP(Crl) No. 2753/2021 (II-C) (FOR RECALLING THE COURTS ORDER ON IA 52156/2021) Date : 18-01-2023 This petition was mentioned today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B.R. GAVAI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKRAM NATH For Petitioner(s) Mr. Kush Chaturvedi, AOR For Respondent(s) Mr. A. P. Mohanty, AOR Mr. E. C. Agrawala, AOR Ms. Srishti Agnihotri, AOR M/S. Ap & J Chambers, AOR Mr. V. N. Raghupathy, AOR UPON being mentioned, the Court made the following O R D E R I.A. No. 52156 of 2021 in SLP(Crl.) No. 2753 of 2021 As prayed, list this application on Monday, i.e. 23.01.2023. (DEEPAK SINGH) (RENU BALA GAMBHIR) COURT MASTER (SH) COURT MASTER (NSH)

SLP R 520/2021 1 ITEM NO.801 COURT NO.1 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.520/2021 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 05-01-2021 in CRLP No.9361/2016 passed by the High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru) B.S YEDDIYURAPPA Petitioner(s) VERSUS A ALAM PASHA & ORS. Respondent(s) (ONLY SLP(Crl) No. 3372/2021 to be listed ) WITH SLP(Crl) No. 2753/2021 (II-C) (With RECALLING THE COURTS ORDER ON IA 52156/2021) Date : 17-01-2023 This petition was MENTIONED today. CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PAMIDIGHANTAM SRI NARASIMHA For Petitioner(s) Mr. Kush Chaturvedi, AOR For Respondent(s) Mr. A. P. Mohanty, AOR (Mentioned by) Mr. Himanshu Dwivedi, Adv. Mr. Samindra Kumar Tripathi, Adv. Mr. E.C. Agrawala, AOR Ms. Srishti Agnihotri, AOR

SLP R 520/2021 2 M/S. Ap & J Chambers Mr. V.N. Raghupathy, AOR UPON being mentioned the Court made the following O R D E R IA No 52156/2021 In SLP (Crl) 2753/2021 1 On mentioning, the matter is taken on Board. 2 Liberty to mention before the Bench presided over by Hon’ble Mr Justice B R Gavai. (CHETAN KUMAR) (BEENA JOLLY) A.R.-cum-P.S. Court Master

ITEM NO.1746 COURT NO.11 SECTION II S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Criminal Appeal No(s). 457/2018 MANJU SURANA Appellant(s) VERSUS RATAN SINGH & ORS. Respondent(s) Date : 13-01-2023 This appeal was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHANSHU DHULIA [IN CHAMBER] For Appellant(s) Mr. Prashant Bhushan, AOR Mr. Arijit Sarkar, Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Merusagar Samantaray, AOR Mr. Gautam Jha, AOR Mr. Nishant Ramakantrao Katneshwarkar, AOR Mr. Nachiketa Joshi, AOR Ms. Radhika Gupta , AOR Mr. Yatim M. Jagtup, Adv. Mr. Aaditya A. Pande, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Delay of 36 days in filing the spare copies is condoned. (KRITIKA TIWARI) (V.M. Bhatnagar) SENIOR PERSONAL ASSISTANT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

SLP(Crl) No. 520/2021 etc. ITEM NO.1745 COURT NO.5 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). 520/2021 B.S YEDDIYURAPPA Petitioner(s) VERSUS A ALAM PASHA & ORS. Respondent(s) (ONLY SLP(Crl) No. 3372/2021 to be listed ) WITH SLP(Crl) No. 3372/2021 (II-C) (FOR ADMISSION and I.R. and IA No.56807/2021-EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT and IA No.56808/2021-EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. I.A-2248/2023-APPLICATION FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING SPARE COPY) SLP(Crl) No. 2753/2021 (II-C) (FOR FOR RECALLING THE COURTS ORDER ON IA 52156/2021 IA No. 52156/2021 - RECALLING THE COURTS ORDER) Date : 06-01-2023 These petitions were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE BELA M. TRIVEDI [IN CHAMBER] For Parties Mr. Dhawesh Pahuja, Adv. Mr. Joseph Pookkatt, Adv. Mr. Prashant Kumar, Adv. Mr. Vaibhav Dwivedi, Adv. M/S. AP & J Chambers, AOR Mr. Kush Chaturvedi, AOR Mr. A. P. Mohanty, AOR Mr. Himanshu Dwivedi, Adv. Mr. E. C. Agrawala, AOR Ms. Srishti Agnihotri, AOR Mr. V. N. Raghupathy, AOR Mr. Varun Varma, Adv. 1

SLP(Crl) No. 520/2021 etc. Mr. Dhanesh Ieshdhan, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Delay occurred in filing the spare copy is condoned. (SONIA BHASIN) (KAMLESH RAWAT) COURT MASTER (SH) COURT MASTER (NSH) 2

SLP(Crl) Nos. 3567-3568/2017 etc. ITEM NO.1739 COURT NO.5 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). 3567- 3568/2017 SHAMIM KHAN Petitioner(s) VERSUS DEBASHISH CHAKRABARTY & ORS. Respondent(s) (ONLY SLP(CRL.) NO. 4606/2017 HAS TO BE LISTED BEFORE THE CHAMBER JUDGE. ) WITH SLP(Crl) No. 4606/2017 (II-A) Date : 06-01-2023 These petitions were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE BELA M. TRIVEDI [IN CHAMBER] For Petitioner(s) Mr. Pukhrambam Ramesh Kumar, AOR Mr. Satwik Parikh, Adv. Mr. Karun Sharma, Adv. Mr. Mohit D. Ram, AOR Ms. Monisha Handa, Adv. Mr. Rajul Shrivastav, Adv. Mr. Anubhav Sharma, Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Uday B. Dube, AOR Mr. Balaji Srinivasan, AOR Mr. Yuvaraj Baburao Gaikwad, Adv. Mr. Siddharth Dharmadhikari, Adv. Mr. Aaditya Aniruddha Pande, AOR Mr. Bharat Bagla, Adv. Ms. Kirti Dadheech, Adv. 1

SLP(Crl) Nos. 3567-3568/2017 etc. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Pursuant to order dated 19.10.2022, no further orders are required to be passed. (SONIA BHASIN) (KAMLESH RAWAT) COURT MASTER (SH) COURT MASTER (NSH) 2

SLPR 9361/2021 1 ITEM NO.37 COURT NO.1 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.9361/2021 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 22-12-2020 in WP No.5043/2019 passed by the High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru) B.S. YEDDYURAPPA Petitioner(s) VERSUS THE STATE OF KARNATAKA & ANR. Respondent(s) (With IA No.51957/2022 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS, IA No. 157938/2021 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT, IA No. 157937/2021 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. and IA No.157936/2021 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/ FACTS/ANNEXURES) Date : 12-12-2022 These matters were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PAMIDIGHANTAM SRI NARASIMHA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DIPANKAR DATTA For Petitioner(s) Mr. Sandeep Patil, Adv. Mr. Kush Chaturvedi, AOR Ms. Priyashree Sharma PH, Adv. Mr. Syed Faraz Alam, Adv. Mr. Atharva Gaur, Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Dhananjay K.V., Adv. Mr. Manish Tiwari, Adv. Mr. Ojaswi, Adv.

SLPR 9361/2021 2 Mr. Sushant Gowda Adv. Ms. Thashmitha Muthanna, Adv. Mr. Prashanth Dixit, Adv. Mr. Sunil Ambalavelil, Adv. Mr. Shashi Bhushan Nagar, Adv. M/s. Devasa & Co. Mr. Nikhil Goel, Adv. Mr. V.N. Raghupathy, AOR Mr. Manendra Pal Gupta, Adv. Mr. Md. Apzal Ansari, Adv. Mr. Prakash Jadhav, Adv. Mr. Ravichandra Jadhav, Adv. Mr. Dhanesh Ieshdhan, Adv. Mr. Varun Varma, Adv. Mr. Premnath Mishra, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R 1 List the Petition on a non miscellaneous day on 17 January 2023. (CHETAN KUMAR) (SAROJ KUMARI GAUR) A.R.-cum-P.S. Assistant Registrar

ITEM NO.48 COURT NO.1 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). 8675/2022 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 07-09-2022 in CRLP No. 5659/2021 passed by the High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru) B.S. YEDIYURAPPA Petitioner(s) VERSUS ABRAHAM T.J. & ORS. Respondent(s) (IA No. 138597/2022 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. IA No. 138595/2022 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES) Date : 02-12-2022 These matters were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PAMIDIGHANTAM SRI NARASIMHA For Petitioner(s) Mr. Siddhartha Dave, Sr. Adv. Mr. Sandeep Patil, Adv. Mr. Kush Chaturvedi, AOR Ms. Priyashree Sharma PH, Adv. Mr. Prastut Dalvi, Adv. Ms. Aarushi Singh, Adv. Ms. Vidhi Thaker, Adv. Mr. Syed Faraz Alam, Adv. Mr. Atharva Gaur, Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Vikas Upadhyay, AOR Mr. Nikhil Goel, AAG Mr. V. N. Raghupathy, AOR Mr. Adithya Roy, Adv. Mr. Apzal Ansari, Adv. Mr. Premnath Mishra, Adv. Mr. Manendra Pal Gupta, Adv. Mr. Varun Varma, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R List on 16 December 2022.

(GULSHAN KUMAR ARORA) (SAROJ KUMARI GAUR) AR-CUM-PS ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

ITEM NO.20 REGISTRAR COURT. 2 SECTION II S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE REGISTRAR SH. S.P.S. LALER Criminal Appeal No(s). 457/2018 MANJU SURANA Appellant(s) VERSUS RATAN SINGH & ORS. Respondent(s) Date : 23-11-2022 This appeal was called on for hearing today. For Appellant(s) Mr. Prashant Bhushan, AOR For Respondent(s) Mr. Merusagar Samantaray, AOR Mr. Sunil Kumar Pandey, Adv. Mr. Sandeep,Adv. Mr. Hemant Kumar Niranjan, Adv. Mr. Gautam Jha, AOR Mr. Nishant Ramakantrao Katneshwarkar, AOR Mr. Nachiketa Joshi, AOR Mr. Uddyam Mukherjee, AOR Mr. Swapnil Pattanayak, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel, the Court made the following O R D E R No one has entered appearance on behalf of Respondent No. 8, despite due service of notice of alternative arrangement. At this stage, Mr. Uddyam Mukherjee, AOR, seeks and is granted four weeks time to file vakalatnama as well as counter affidavit, on behalf of Respondent No. 8. Two weeks time is granted, to file spare copy, to effect service of NLPA, upon Respondent No. 4. Service of notice is complete upon all the other respondents. List on 11.01.2023. S.P.S. LALER Registrar SC

ITEM NO.23 COURT NO.13 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 for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No.3372/2021 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 17-03-2021 in CRLRP No. 1120/2016 passed by the High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru) KATTA SUBRAMANYAM Petitioner(s) VERSUS A. ALAM PASHA & ORS. Respondent(s) (FOR ADMISSION and I.R. and IA No.56807/2021-EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT and IA No.56808/2021-EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. ) Date : 18-11-2022 This petition was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. BOPANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PAMIDIGHANTAM SRI NARASIMHA For Petitioner(s) Mr. Prashant Kumar, Adv. Mr. Dhawesh Pahuja, Adv. Mr. Vaibhav Dwivedi, Adv. M/S. Ap & J Chambers, AOR For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Issue notice. Tag with SLP(Crl.) 2753 of 2021. (RAJNI MUKHI) (DIPTI KHURANA) COURT MASTER (SH) ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

1 ITEM NO.30 COURT NO.1 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).8675/2022 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 07-09-2022 in CRLP No. 5659/2021 passed by the High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru) B.S. YEDIYURAPPA Petitioner(s) VERSUS ABRAHAM T.J. & ORS. Respondent(s) (WITH IA No. 138597/2022 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T., IA No. 138595/2022 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES) Date : 18-11-2022 This petition was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI For Petitioner(s) Mr. Siddhartha Dave, Sr. Adv. Mr. Sandeep Patil, Adv. Mr. Kush Chaturvedi, AoR Ms. Priyashree Sharma PH, Adv. Mr. Prastut Dalvi, Adv. Ms. Aarushi Singh, Adv. Ms. Vidhi Thaker, Adv. Mr. Syed Faraz Alam, Adv. Mr. Atharva Gaur, Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Vikas Upadhyay, AOR Mr. Ashwin Kumar Nair, Adv. Mr. Gaurav Gk, Adv. Mr. Gopalakrishna, Adv. Ms. Sneha Abraham, Adv. Mr. Alok Tiwari, Adv. Mr. V. N. Raghupathy, AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R 1 Two weeks’ time is granted for filing counter affidavit.

2 2 List the Special Leave Petition on 2 December 2022. (SANJAY KUMAR-I) (SAROJ KUMARI GAUR) DEPUTY REGISTRAR ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

ITEM NO.53 COURT NO.1 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). 9361/2021 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 22-12-2020 in WP No. 5043/2019 passed by the High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru) B.S. YEDDYURAPPA Petitioner(s) VERSUS THE STATE OF KARNATAKA & ANR. Respondent(s) (IA No. 51957/2022 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 157938/2021 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT IA No. 157937/2021 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. IA No. 157936/2021 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES) Date : 11-11-2022 These matters were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI For Petitioner(s) Mr. Kush Chaturvedi, AOR For Respondent(s) Mr. K.V. Dhananjay, Adv. Mr. Manish Tiwari, Adv. Ms. Thashmitha Muthanna, Adv. Mr. Prashanth Dixit, Adv. Mr. Sunil Ambalavelil, Adv. Mr. Shashi Bhushan Nagar, Adv. M/s. Devasa & Co., AOR Mr. V. N. Raghupathy, AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R 1 List the petition on 12 December 2022. (GULSHAN KUMAR ARORA) (SAROJ KUMARI GAUR) AR-CUM-PS ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

1 ITEM NO.48 COURT NO.2 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). 8675/2022 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 07-09-2022 in CRLP No. 5659/2021 passed by the High Court Of Karnataka At Bengaluru) B.S. YEDIYURAPPA Petitioner(s) VERSUS ABRAHAM T.J. & ORS. Respondent(s) (IA No. 138597/2022 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. IA No. 138595/2022 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES) Date : 31-10-2022 These matters were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE D.Y. CHANDRACHUD HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI For Petitioner(s) Mr. Siddhartha Dave, Sr. Adv. Mr. Kush Chaturvedi, AOR For Respondent(s) Mr. Vikas Upadhyay, AOR Mr. Ashwin Kumar Nair, Adv. Mr. Gaurav GK, Adv. Mr. Gopalakrishna, Adv. Ms. Sneha Abraham, Adv. Mr. Alok Tiwari, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R 1 On the request of Mr Siddartha Dave, senior counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, liberty to implead the State of Karnataka as a respondent to these proceedings.

2 2 Notice shall be issued to the newly added respondent. 3 Liberty to serve the Standing Counsel for the State of Karnataka. 4 List on 18 November 2022. 5 The order of stay shall stand extended till further orders. (GULSHAN KUMAR ARORA) (SAROJ KUMARI GAUR) AR-CUM-PS ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

ITEM NO.62 COURT NO.2 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).9361/2021 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 22-12-2020 in WP No. 5043/2019 passed by the High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru) B.S. YEDDYURAPPA Petitioner(s) VERSUS THE STATE OF KARNATAKA & ANR. Respondent(s) (WITH IA No. 51957/2022 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS, IA No. 157938/2021 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT, IA No. 157937/2021 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T., IA No. 157936/2021 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES) Date : 21-10-2022 This petition was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE D.Y. CHANDRACHUD HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI For Petitioner(s) Mr. Kush Chaturvedi, AOR For Respondent(s) Mr. K.V. Dhananjay, Adv. Mr. Pawan Shyam, Adv. Mr. Manish Tiwari, Adv. Mr. Sunil Ambalavelil, Adv. Thashmitha Muthanna, Adv. Mr. Shashi Bhushan Nagar M/S. Devasa & Co., AOR Mr. V. N. Raghupathy, AOR Mr. Parikshit Angadi, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R List the Special Leave Petition on 11 November 2022. (SANJAY KUMAR-I) (SAROJ KUMARI GAUR) DEPUTY REGISTRAR ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

ITEM NO.1715 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.) Nos.3567-3568/2017 SHAMIM KHAN Petitioner(s) VERSUS DEBASHISH CHAKRABARTY & ORS. Respondent(s) (IA No. 31677/2021 - APPLICATION UNDER ORDER V RULE 20 CPC FOR EFFECTING SERVICE THROUGH PUBLICATION) WITH SLP(Crl) No. 4608/2017 SLP(Crl) No. 4607/2017 (IA No. 35778/2021 - SUBSTITUTED SERVICE) SLP(Crl) No. 4606/2017 Date : 19-10-2022 These matters were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ABHAY S. OKA [IN CHAMBER] For Petitioner(s) Mr. Pukhrambam Ramesh Kumar, AOR Mr. Mohit D. Ram, AOR Ms. Monisha Handa,Adv. Mr. Rajul Shrivastav,Adv. Mr. Anubhav Sharma,Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Uday B. Dube, AOR Mr. Ashish Wad,Adv. Ms. Tamali Wad,Adv. Mr. Sidharth Mahajan,Adv. Mr. Ajeyo Sharma,Adv. For M/S. J S Wad And Co, AOR Mr. Sachin Patil, AOR Mr. Omkar Jayant Deshpande,Adv. Mr. Siddharth Dharmadhikari,Adv. Mr. Aaditya Aniruddha Pande, AOR Mr. P. N. Puri, AOR 1

Mr. Abhishek Bharti,Adv. Ms. Aarti Mahto,Adv. Mr. Balaji Srinivasan, AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R SLP(Crl.)Nos.3567-3568/2017 Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner states that Cause List shows that Mr. Uday B.Dube, learned counsel is representing respondent Nos.1 and 2. Hence, learned counsel seeks permission to withdraw I.A.No.31677/2021. The application is accordingly dismissed as withdrawn. SLP(Crl.)No.4606/2017 Six weeks' time is finally granted to the learned counsel for the petitioner to file proof of publication in respect of the respondent Nos. 2 to 5. On the failure to comply with the direction within a period of six weeks from today, the Special Leave Petition shall stand dismissed for non-prosecution against the respondent Nos. 2 to 5, without further reference to the Court. (ANITA MALHOTRA) (KAMLESH RAWAT) AR-CUM-PS COURT MASTER 2

ITEM NO.4 COURT NO.1 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). 520/2021 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 05-01-2021 in CRLP No. 9361/2016 passed by the High Court Of Karnataka At Bengaluru) B.S YEDDIYURAPPA Petitioner(s) VERSUS A ALAM PASHA & ORS. Respondent(s) (ONLY IA 52156/2021 (FOR RECALLING THE COURTS ORDER) IN SLP (CRL) NO 2753/21 IS LISTED AGAINST THIS ITEM) WITH SLP(Crl) No. 2753/2021 (II-C) (FOR RECALLING THE COURTS ORDER ON IA 52156/2021) Date : 14-10-2022 These petitions were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA For Petitioner(s) Mr. K.V. Viswanathan, Sr. Adv. Mr. Kush Chaturvedi, AOR Mr. Amartya Sharan, Adv. Ms. Priyashree Sharma, Adv. Mr. Syed Faraz Alam, Adv. Mr. Atharva Gaur, Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. A. P. Mohanty, AOR Mr. Samindra Kumar Tripathi, Adv. Mr. Mahesh Agarwal, Adv. Mr. Rishi Agrawala, Adv. Mr. Ankur Saigal, Adv. Ms. S. Lakshmi Iyer, Adv. Mr. Saransh Jain, Adv. Mr. E. C. Agrawala, AOR Ms. Anitha Shenoy, Sr. Adv. Ms. Srishti Agnihotri, AOR Ms. Sanjana Grace Thomas, Adv. Ms. Anushma Awasthi, Adv. Ms. Namrata Saran Caleb, Adv. Ms. Mantika Vohra, Adv. Mr. Joseph Pookkatt, Adv.

Mr. Prashant Kumar, Adv. Mr. Dhawesh Pahuja, Adv. Mr. Vaibhav Dwivedi, Adv. For M/s AP & J Chambers, AOR Mr. V. N. Raghupathy, AOR Mr. Md. Apzal Ansari, Adv. Mr. Manender Pal Gupta, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R List the matter after the ensuing Diwali holidays before a Bench of which one of us (Uday Umesh Lalit, CJI) is not a member. (SANJAY KUMAR-II) (VIRENDER SINGH) ASTT. REGISTRAR-cum-PS BRANCH OFFICER

ITEM NO.5 REGISTRAR COURT. 2 SECTION II S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE REGISTRAR SH. S.P.S. LALER Criminal Appeal No(s). 457/2018 MANJU SURANA Appellant(s) VERSUS RATAN SINGH & ORS. Respondent(s) Date : 11-10-2022 This appeal was called on for hearing today. For Appellant(s) Mr. Prashant Bhushan, AOR For Respondent(s) Mr. Merusagar Samantaray, AOR Mr. Gautam Jha, AOR Mr. Nishant Ramakantrao Katneshwarkar, AOR Mr. Nachiketa Joshi, AOR UPON hearing the counsel through Video Conference, the Court made the following O R D E R Fresh notice of alternative arrangement be issued to respondent no. 8. Apart from above, Order IV Rule 18. Order IV Rule 18 is reproduced as under: “An advocate-on-record who, on being designated as a senior advocate or on being appointed as a Judge or for any other reason ceases to be an advocate-on-record for any party in a case shall forthwith inform the party concerned that he has ceased to represent the said party as advocate-on-record in the case. The senior advocate, so designated, shall not appear as senior advocate till he reports to the Registry that parties represented by him

earlier have been so informed of his designation as senior advocate and that necessary arrangements have been made for the parties to make appearance before the Court in all the cases represented by him till then”. In view of the aforesaid rule, Registry to issue letter to Mr. Rajeev Sharma, (Now Senior Advocate) requesting him to inform the Registry as to what steps have been taken by him under Order IV Rule 18. Reply received with office report be placed on next date. List again on 23.11.2022. S.P.S. LALER Registrar pm

ITEM NO.28 COURT NO.11 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). 3372/2021 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 17-03-2021 in CRLRP No. 1120/2016 passed by the High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru) KATTA SUBRAMANYAM Petitioner(s) VERSUS A. ALAM PASHA & ORS. Respondent(s) (FOR ADMISSION and I.R. and IA No.56807/2021-EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT and IA No.56808/2021-EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. ) Date : 10-10-2022 This petition was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.K. MAHESHWARI For Petitioner(s) Mr. Joseph Pookkatt, Adv. Mr. Prashant Kumar, Adv. Mr. Vaibhav Dwivedi, Adv. Mr. Dhwesh Pahuja, Adv. M/S. Ap & J Chambers, AOR For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel, the Court made the following O R D E R Our attention is drawn to the order dated 05.04.2021 passed in SLP (Crl.) No. 2753 of 2021. Subject to orders of the Hon’ble the Chief Justice of India, list the present Special Leave Petition before the Bench presided over by Hon’ble Mr. Justice A.S. Bopanna. (BABITA PANDEY) (R.S. NARAYANAN) COURT MASTER (SH) COURT MASTER (NSH)

SLPR 8675/2022 1 ITEM NO.28 COURT NO.2 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.8675/2022 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 07-09-2022 in CRLP No.5659/2021 passed by the High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru) B.S. YEDIYURAPPA Petitioner(s) VERSUS ABRAHAM T.J. & ORS. Respondent(s) (With IA No.138597/2022 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. and IA No. 138595/2022 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/ FACTS/ANNEXURES) Date : 23-09-2022 These matters were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE D.Y. CHANDRACHUD HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI For Petitioner(s) Mr. Mukul Rohatgi, Sr. Adv. Mr. Siddhartha Dave, Sr. Adv. Mr. Sandeep Patil, Adv. Mr. Nikhil Rohatgi, Adv. Ms. Priyashree Sharma PH, Adv. Mr. Syed Faraz Alam, Adv. Ms. Aarushi Singh, Adv. Mr. Kush Chaturvedi, AOR For Respondent(s) Mr. Vikas Upadhyay, AOR Mr. Ashwin Kr. Nair, Adv. Mr. Gaurav GK, Adv.

SLPR 8675/2022 2 Mr. Gopalakrishna, Adv. Ms. Sneha Abraham, Adv. Mr. Alok Tiwari, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R 1 Issue notice. 2 Mr Vikas Upadhyay, counsel accepts notice on behalf of the first respondent. 3 Service on respondent Nos 2 to 9 is dispensed with at this stage. 4 Counter affidavit be filed within four weeks from today. 5 There shall be a stay of further proceedings in PCR No 40 of 2021, pending before the court of LXXXI Additional City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru (CCH-82) insofar as the petitioner is concerned till the next date of listing. 6 List the Special Leave Petition on 31 October 2022. (CHETAN KUMAR) (SAROJ KUMARI GAUR) A.R.-cum-P.S. Assistant Registrar

1 ITEM NO.30 REGISTRAR COURT. 2 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 BEFORE THE REGISTRAR SH. S.P.S. LALER Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s). 520/2021 B.S YEDDIYURAPPA Petitioner(s) VERSUS A ALAM PASHA & ORS. Respondent(s) WITH SLP(Crl) No. 758/2021 (II-C) SLP(Crl) No. 2771-2773/2021 (II-C) (FOR ADMISSION and I.R. and IA No.45642/2021-EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT) SLP(Crl) No. 2753/2021 (II-C) (FOR ADMISSION and I.R.) SLP(Crl) No. 2318/2021 (II-C) (FOR ADMISSION and I.R. and IA No.37670/2021-EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT and IA No.37664/2021-PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES) Date : 19-09-2022 This petition was called on for hearing today. For Petitioner(s) Ms. Mantika Vohra,Adv. Ms. Srishti Agnihotri, AOR Mr. E. C. Agrawala, AOR Mr. Kush Chaturvedi, AOR Ms. Priyashree Sharma PH.,Adv. Mr. Syed Faraz Alam,Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. A. P. Mohanty, AOR Mr. Samindra Kumar Tripathi,Adv.

2 Ms. Mantika Vohra,Adv. Ms. Srishti Agnihotri, AOR Mr. Joseph Pookkath,Adv. Mr. Prashant Kumar,Adv. Mr. Dhawesh Pahuja,Adv. M/S. AP & J Chambers, AOR Mr. V. N. Raghupathy, AOR UPON hearing the counsel through Video Conference, the Court made the following O R D E R SLP(Crl) No. 520/2021 and 758/2021 The office report indicates that Respondent Nos. 1 and 4 have already filed the counter affidavit. Service of notice is complete on respondent No. 2 but no one has entered appearance on his behalf. Learned counsel for the petitioners shall within a period of two weeks,as a last chance file the fresh particulars of respondent No. 3 and he shall also take fresh steps for the service of notice to him within the same period. SLP(Crl) No. 2771-2773/2021 Four weeks time is given to respondent No.12 to file the counter affidavit. Service of notice is complete on respondent Nos. 2 to 5, 7, 8, 10 and 11 but no one has entered appearance on their behalf. As per postal tracking report notice issued to respondent No. 6 and 9 has been received back with postal remarks “Addressee Left” and “No such person”. Hence, learned counsel for the petitioners shall within a period of two weeks file the fresh particulars of the said respondents and he shall also take fresh steps for the service of notice to them within the same period. SLP(Crl) No. 2753/2021

3 The office report indicates that Respondent No. 1 has already filed the counter affidavit. Service of notice is complete on respondent Nos. 2 to 6, 8, 9 and 13 but no one has entered appearance on their behalf. Learned counsel for the petitioners shall within a period of two weeks,as a last chance file the fresh particulars of respondent Nos. 7 and 10 and he shall also take fresh steps for the service of notice to them within the same period. Four weeks time is given to respondent Nos. 11 and 12 to file the counter affidavit. SLP(Crl) No. 2318/2021 The office report indicates that Respondent No. 1 has already filed the counter affidavit. Service of notice is complete on respondent No.3 but no one has entered appearance on his behalf. Learned counsel for the petitioners shall within a period of two weeks,as a last chance file the fresh particulars of respondent Nos. 2 and 4 and he shall also take fresh steps for the service of notice to them within the same period. List again on 7.11.2022. S.P.S. LALER Registrar MG

ITEM NO.71 COURT NO.2 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).8675/2022 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 07-09-2022 in CRLP No. 5659/2021 passed by the High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru) B.S. YEDIYURAPPA Petitioner(s) VERSUS ABRAHAM T.J. & ORS. Respondent(s) (WITH IA No. 138597/2022 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T., IA No. 138595/2022 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES) Date : 19-09-2022 This petition was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE D.Y. CHANDRACHUD HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI For Petitioner(s) Mr. Mukul Rohatgi, Sr. Adv. Mr. Siddhartha Dave, Sr. Adv. Mr. Sandeep Patil, Adv. Mr. Kush Chaturvedi, AOR Ms. Priyashree Sharma PH, Adv. Mr. Syed Faraz Alam, Adv. Ms. Aarushi Singh, Adv. Ms. Mishra Rohatgi, Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Vikas Upadhyay, AOR Mr. Ashwin Kr. Nair, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R List the Special Leave Petition on 23 September 2022. (SANJAY KUMAR-I) (MONIKA DEY) DEPUTY REGISTRAR COURT MASTER

ITEM NO.813 COURT NO.2 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.8675/2022 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 07-09-2022 in CRLP No.5659/2021 passed by the High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru) B.S. YEDIYURAPPA Petitioner(s) VERSUS ABRAHAM T.J. & ORS. Respondent(s) Date : 16-09-2022 This petition was MENTIONED today. CORAM : HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE D.Y. CHANDRACHUD HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI For Petitioner(s) Mr. Kush Chaturvedi, Adv. (Mentioned by) Ms. Priyashree Sharma PH, Adv. Mr. Syed Faraz Alam, Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Vikas Upadhyay, Adv. Mr. Ashwin Kr. Nair, Adv. UPON being mentioned the Court made the following O R D E R 1 On mentioning, the matter is taken on Board. 2 List the Special Leave Petition on 19 September 2022 before the appropriate Bench. (CHETAN KUMAR) (SAROJ KUMARI GAUR) A.R.-cum-P.S. Assistant Registrar

ITEM NO.23 REGISTRAR COURT. 2 SECTION II S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE REGISTRAR SH. S.P.S. LALER Criminal Appeal No(s). 457/2018 MANJU SURANA Appellant(s) VERSUS RATAN SINGH & ORS. Respondent(s) (ONLY SR- 265/2019 is to be listed before Ld. Registrar Court for Service Compliance ) WITH SLP(Crl) No. 265/2019 (II-C) Date : 12-09-2022 This appeal was called on for hearing today. For Appellant(s) Mr. Chandra Bhushan Prasad, AOR Mr. Prashant Bhushan, AOR For Respondent(s) Mr. Chirag M. Shroff, AOR Mr. Merusagar Samantaray, AOR Mr. Gautam Jha, AOR Mr. Nishant Ramakantrao Katneshwarkar, AOR Mr. Nachiketa Joshi, AOR UPON hearing the counsel through Video Conference, the Court made the following O R D E R SLP(Crl) No. 265/2019 None present for the petitioner. Counter affidavit has already been filed on behalf of respondent no. 1. Despite due service, none appears on behalf of respondent nos. 3 to 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner has failed to take fresh steps and furnish fresh particulars in respect of respondent no. 2. Hence, process the matter for listing before the Hon’ble Judge-in-Chambers for further directions. S.P.S. LALER Registrar pm

ITEM NO.1705 COURT NO.15 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). 3232/2019 NAMONARAYAN MEENA Petitioner(s) VERSUS STATE THROUGH THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE CBI/ACB/CHENNAI & ANR.Respondent(s) (ONLY office report for direction in SLP(CRL.) D. NO. 5152/2021 IS to be listed ) WITH Diary No(s). 5152/2020 (II-C) Date : 10-08-2022 This petition was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ABHAY S. OKA [IN CHAMBER] For Petitioner(s) Mr. Rishi Malhotra, AOR Mr. Praneet Pranav, Adv. Mr. Mukesh Kumar Maroria, AOR For Respondent(s) Ms. Mahamaya Chatterjee, Adv. Mr. Arvind Kumar Sharma, AOR Mr. Rishi Malhotra, AOR Mr. E. C. Agrawala, AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Diary No(s). 5152/2020 Time of six weeks is granted to the petitioner to complete the service of all unserved repondents. Issue fresh notice to the unserved respondents. In addition, Dasti is permitted. (SNEHA) (PREETHI T.C.) SENIOR PERSONAL ASSISTANT COURT MASTER (NSH)

ITEM NO.5 REGISTRAR COURT. 2 SECTION II S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE REGISTRAR SH. S.P.S. LALER Criminal Appeal No(s). 457/2018 MANJU SURANA Appellant(s) VERSUS RATAN SINGH & ORS. Respondent(s) (ONLY SR- 265/2019 is to be listed before Ld. Registrar Court for Service Compliance ) WITH SLP(Crl) No. 265/2019 (II-C) Date : 28-07-2022 This appeal was called on for hearing today. For Appellant(s) Mr. Chandra Bhushan Prasad, AOR Mr. Prashant Bhushan, AOR For Respondent(s) Mr. Chirag M. Shroff, AOR Mr. Amandeep Mehta, Adv. Mr. Merusagar Samantaray, AOR Mr. Gautam Jha, AOR Mr. Nishant Ramakantrao Katneshwarkar, AOR Mr. Nachiketa Joshi, AOR Mr. Aditya Gauri, Adv. Mr. Amar Vivek, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel through Video Conference, the Court made the following O R D E R SLP(Crl) No. 265/2019 Despite due service, none appears on behalf of respondent nos. 3 to 5. Counter affidavit has been filed in respect of respondent no. 1. Same is defective. Two weeks time, as a last chance, is granted

to learned counsel to cure the defects. In case the defects are not cured, same be taken off record. Learned counsel for the petitioner has failed to take fresh steps and furnish fresh particulars in respect of respondent no. 2. However, as prayed, service be effected on the respondent through his employer i.e. Delhi Police (through Commissioner of Delhi Police, Delhi). Details be furnished and steps be taken in this regard within two weeks by learned counsel for petitioner. List again on 12.09.2022. S.P.S. LALER Registrar pm

1 ITEM NO.31 COURT NO.1 SECTION IIC S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Petition for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No.9361/2021 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 22122020 in WP No. 5043/2019 passed by the High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru) B.S. YEDDYURAPPA Petitioner(s) VERSUS THE STATE OF KARNATAKA & ANR. Respondent(s) (FOR ADMISSION and I.R. and IA No.157938/2021EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT, IA No.157937/2021EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T., IA No.51957/2022APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS and IA No.157936/2021PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/ FACTS/ANNEXURES) Date : 22072022 This petition was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KRISHNA MURARI HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI For Petitioner(s) Mr. K.V. Vishwanathan, Sr. Adv. Mr. Sandeep Patil, Adv. Mr. Amartya Sharan, Adv. Ms. Priyashree Sharma PH, Adv. Mr. Syed Faraz Alam, Adv. Mr. Kush Chaturvedi, AOR For Respondent(s) Mr.K.V. Dhananjay, Adv. Mr. Manish Tiwari, Adv. Thashmitha Muthanna, Adv. Mr. Prashanth Dixit, Adv. Mr. Satvisa Pattnayak, Adv. For M/s. Devasa & Co., AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R 1. Heard learned Senior counsel appearing for the petitioner and perused the material available on record.

2 2. Applications seeking exemption from filing certified copy of the impugned order as also for seeking exemption from filing official translation of the Annexures are allowed. 3. Issue notice. 4. Learned AdvocateonRecord for the Respondent No.2 – caveator accepts and waives formal notice on behalf of the said respondent. 5. Dasti service, in addition, is permitted. 6. In the meantime, there shall be stay of further proceedings arising out of (i) PCR No. 51/2013 and (ii) FIR in Crime No. 11/2015 pending before the Learned XXIII Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bangalore City at Bangalore, until further orders. 7. The Registry is directed to list this matter after service is complete on the respondents. (VISHAL ANAND) (R.S. NARAYANAN) ASTT. REGISTRARcumPS COURT MASTER (NSH)

1 ITEM NO.4 REGISTRAR COURT. 2 SECTION II S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE REGISTRAR SH. S.P.S. LALER Criminal Appeal No(s). 457/2018 MANJU SURANA Appellant(s) VERSUS RATAN SINGH & ORS. Respondent(s) (ONLY SR- 265/2019 is to be listed before Ld. Registrar Court for Service Compliance ) WITH SLP(Crl) No. 265/2019 (II-C) Date : 28-04-2022 This appeal was called on for hearing today. For Appellant(s) Mr. Chandra Bhushan Prasad, AOR Mr. Prashant Bhushan, AOR For Respondent(s) Mr. Chirag M. Shroff, AOR Mr. Amandeep Mehta, Adv. Mr. Merusagar Samantaray, AOR Mr. Gautam Jha, AOR Mr. Nishant Ramakantrao Katneshwarkar, AOR Mr. Nachiketa Joshi, AOR UPON hearing the counsel through Video Conference, the Court made the following O R D E R SLP(Crl) No. 265/2019 Service of notice is complete on respondent Nos. 3 to 5 but none has entered appearance on their behalf. The office report indicates that the counter affidavit filed by learned counsel for respondent No.1 is defective. Ld. counsel shall within a period of two weeks, as last chance cure the

2 defects. Learned counsel for petitioner shall within a period of two weeks, as a last chance file the fresh particulars of respondent No. 2 and he shall also take fresh steps for the service of notice to him within the same period. List again on 28.07.2022. S.P.S. LALER Registrar MG

ITEM NO.1702 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 for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No. 3232/2019 NAMONARAYAN MEENA Petitioner(s) VERSUS STATE THROUGH THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE Respondent(s) CBI/ACB/CHENNAI & ANR. (ONLY office report for direction in SLP(CRL.) D. NO. 5152/2021 IS to be listed ) WITH Diary No(s). 5152/2020 (II-C) (FOR ADMISSION and I.R. and IA No.47821/2020-CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING and IA No.47822/2020-EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT and IA No.47820/2020-PERMISSION TO FILE PETITION (SLP/TP/WP/..)) Date : 13-04-2022 This petition was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ABHAY S. OKA [IN CHAMBER] For Petitioner(s) Mr. Rishi Malhotra, AOR Mr. B. Krishna Prasad, AOR Mr. Vikas Bansal, AOR Mr. MK Maroria, Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Arvind Kumar Sharma, AOR Mr. A. Debkumar, Adv. Ms. A. Deepa, Adv. Mr. Rishi Malhotra, AOR Mr. E. C. Agrawala, AOR Mr. Arvind Gupta, AOR Mr. Shekhar Yadav, Adv. Mr. Mohit Bidhuri, Adv. 1

UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R On the prayer made by the learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner, fresh notice be issued to the respondent Nos. 10, 11 and 26. Dasti service, in addition, is permitted. Time of six weeks is granted to file an affidavit of dasti service. (HARSHITA UPPAL) (PREETHI T.C.) SENIOR PERSONAL ASSISTANT COURT MASTER (NSH) 2

1 ITEM NO.2 REGISTRAR COURT. 2 SECTION II S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE REGISTRAR SH. SAURABH PARTAP SINGH LALER Criminal Appeal No(s). 457/2018 MANJU SURANA Appellant(s) VERSUS RATAN SINGH & ORS. Respondent(s) (ONLY SR- 265/2019 is to be listed before Ld. Registrar Court for Service Compliance ) WITH SLP(Crl) No. 265/2019 (II-C) Date : 15-03-2022 This appeal was called on for hearing today. For Appellant(s) Mr. Chandra Bhushan Prasad, AOR Mr. Prashant Bhushan, AOR For Respondent(s) Mr. Chirag M. Shroff, AOR Mr. Merusagar Samantaray, AOR Mr. Gautam Jha, AOR Mr. Nishant Ramakantrao Katneshwarkar, AOR Mr. Nachiketa Joshi, AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R SLP(Crl) No. 265/2019 The office report indicates that the counter affidavit filed by the learned counsel for respondent No.1 is defective. The learned counsel shall within a period of two weeks cure the defects whatever have been found in the said counter affidavit. Service of notice is complete on respondent Nos. 3 to 5 but no one has entered appearance on their behalf.

2 As per postal tracking report notice issued to respondent No. 2 has been received back with postal remarks “Recipient not found”. Hence, learned counsel for the petitioner shall within a period of two weeks file the fresh particulars of the said respondent and he shall also take fresh steps for the service of notice to him within the same period. List again on 28.4.2022. SAURABH PARTAP SINGH LALER Registrar MG

ITEM NO.1705 Court 14 (Video Conferencing) 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). 3567- 3568/2017 SHAMIM KHAN Petitioner(s) VERSUS DEBASHISH CHAKRABARTY & ORS. Respondent(s) IA No. 31677/2021 - APPLICATION UNDER ORDER V RULE 20 CPC FOR EFFECTING SERVICE THROUGH PUBLICATION) WITH SLP(Crl) No. 4608/2017 (II-A) SLP(Crl) No. 4607/2017 (II-A) SLP(Crl) No. 4606/2017 (II-A) Date : 04-03-2022 These matters were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKRAM NATH [IN CHAMBERS] For Petitioner(s) Mr. Pukhrambam Ramesh Kumar, AOR Ms. Anupama Ngangom, Adv. Mr. Karun Sharma, Adv. Mr. V. Madhukar, Adv. Ms. Monisha Handa, Adv. Mr. Mohit D. Ram, AOR For Respondent(s) Mr. Uday B. Dube, AOR M/S. J S Wad And Co, AOR Mr. Sachin Patil, AOR Mr. Rahul Chitnis, Adv. Mr. Aaditya A. Pande, Adv. Mr. Geo Joseph, Adv. Ms. Shwetal Shepal, Adv. Mr. C. Aravind, Adv. Mr. Balaji Srinivasan, AOR Mr. P. N. Puri, AOR

UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R IA No. 35762/2021 in SLP(Crl) No. 4608/2017 & IA No. 35789/2021 in SLP(Crl) No. 4606/2017 The applications are allowed as prayed for. Necessary steps be taken within four weeks. SLP(Crl) No. 4607/2017 List again after a week. In the meantime, counsel for petitioner may file an appropriate application. In case learned counsel for petitioner is successful in getting his application filed earlier traced out from the registry, the same may be placed on record. In that event no fresh application need be filed. (SHUBHAM YADAV) (RENU KALIA) SENIOR PERSONAL ASSISTANT BRANCH OFFICER

ITEM NO.801 Court 1 (Video Conferencing) 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 for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No. 9361/2021 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 22-12-2020 in WP No. 5043/2019 passed by the High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru) B.S. YEDDYURAPPA Petitioner(s) VERSUS THE STATE OF KARNATAKA & ANR. Respondent(s) Date : 18-02-2022 This petition was mentioned today. CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. BOPANNA HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI For Petitioner(s) Mr. K.V. Viswanathan, Sr. Adv.(mentioned by) Mr. Sandeep Patil, Adv. Ms. Priyashree Sharma PH, Adv. Mr. Syed Faraz Alam, Adv. Mr. Kush Chaturvedi, AOR For Respondent(s) M/S. Devasa & Co., AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Upon being mentioned by Mr. K.V.Viswanathan, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner, we deem it appropriate to direct the Registry to list the matter before an appropriate Bench. (RAJNI MUKHI) (R.S. NARAYANAN) COURT MASTER (SH) COURT MASTER (NSH)

ITEM NO.4 REGISTRAR COURT. 1 THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCE 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 BEFORE THE REGISTRAR SH. AVANI PAL SINGH Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s). 3232/2019 NAMONARAYAN MEENA Petitioner(s) VERSUS STATE THROUGH THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE CBI/ACB/CHENNAI & ANR.Respondent(s) (ONLY SLP(CRL.) D. NO. 5152/2021 IS BEING LISTED ) WITH Diary No(s). 5152/2020 (II-C) (FOR ADMISSION and I.R. and IA No.47821/2020-CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING and IA No.47822/2020-EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT and IA No.47820/2020-PERMISSION TO FILE PETITION (SLP/TP/WP/..)) Date : 15-12-2021 This petition was called on for hearing today. For Petitioner(s) Mr. Rishi Malhotra, AOR Mr. B. Krishna Prasad, AOR Ms Reena Pandey, Adv. Mr M.K.Maroria, AOR For Respondent(s) Dr(Mrs). Laxmi Shastri, Adv. Mr. Arvind Kumar Sharma, AOR Mr. Rishi Malhotra, AOR Mr. E. C. Agrawala, AOR UPON hearing the counsel, the Court made the following O R D E R Diary No(s). 5152/2020 Respondent nos. 1 to 9, 12 to 15, 17 to 25 and 27 to 30 have filed counter affidavit. Contd....

-2- Service is complete on respondent no.16 but none has entered appearance. Ld. Counsel for the petitioner has not taken fresh steps alongwith fresh particulars in respect of unserved respondent nos.10,11 and 26 despite last opportunity having been granted, as such, Registry to process the matter for listing before the Hon'ble Judge in Chambers for necessary directions. AVANI PAL SINGH Registrar

ITEM NO.4 REGISTRAR COURT. 1 THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCE 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 BEFORE THE REGISTRAR SH. RAJESH KUMAR GOEL Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s). 3232/2019 NAMONARAYAN MEENA Petitioner(s) VERSUS STATE THROUGH THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE CBI/ACB/CHENNAI & ANR.Respondent(s) (ONLY SLP(CRL.) D. NO. 5152/2021 IS BEING LISTED ) WITH Diary No(s). 5152/2020 (II-C) (FOR ADMISSION and I.R. and IA No.47821/2020-CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING and IA No.47822/2020-EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT and IA No.47820/2020-PERMISSION TO FILE PETITION (SLP/TP/WP/..)) Date : 29-10-2021 This petition was called on for hearing today. For Petitioner(s) Mr. Rishi Malhotra, AOR Mr. B. Krishna Prasad, AOR Mr Ashok Kumar, Adv. Mr M.K.Maroria, AOR For Respondent(s) Mr Deepak Tyagi, Adv. Mr. Arvind Kumar Sharma, AOR Mr. Rishi Malhotra, AOR Mr. E. C. Agrawala, AOR UPON hearing the counsel through Video Conference, the Court made the following O R D E R Diary No(s). 5152/2020 Counter affidavit filed on behalf of respondent no.1 is defective. Defects be dealt with in terms of Supreme Court Rules, 2013.

-2- Item No.4 Ld. Counsel for the petitioner to take fresh steps alongwith fresh particulars to effect service on respondent nos.10, 11 and 26 within two weeks time, as last opportunity. List again on 15.12.2021. RAJESH KUMAR GOEL Registrar

ITEM NO.3 REGISTRAR COURT. 1 THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCE 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 BEFORE THE REGISTRAR SH. RAJESH KUMAR GOEL Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s). 3232/2019 NAMONARAYAN MEENA Petitioner(s) VERSUS STATE THROUGH THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE CBI/ACB/CHENNAI & ANR.Respondent(s) (ONLY SLP(CRL.) D. NO. 5152/2021 IS BEING LISTED ) WITH Diary No(s). 5152/2020 (II-C) (FOR ADMISSION and I.R. and IA No.47821/2020-CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING and IA No.47822/2020-EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT and IA No.47820/2020-PERMISSION TO FILE PETITION (SLP/TP/WP/..)) Date : 13-09-2021 This petition was called on for hearing today. For Petitioner(s) Mr. Rishi Malhotra, AOR Mr. B. Krishna Prasad, AOR For Respondent(s) Mr Suryodaya Prakash Tiwari, Adv. Mr. Arvind Kumar Sharma, AOR Mr. Rishi Malhotra, AOR Mr. E. C. Agrawala, AOR UPON hearing the counsel through Video Conference, the Court made the following O R D E R Diary No(s). 5152/2020 Respondent no.1 has filed counter affidavit but copy has not been served on the other side. Be served. Respondent nos. 2 to 9, 12 to 15, 17 to 25 and 27 to 30 have filed counter affidavit.

-2- Item No.3 Service is complete on respondent no.16 but none has entered appearance. Ld. Counsel for the petitioner to take fresh steps alongwith fresh particulars to effect service on respondent nos.10,11 and 26 within two weeks time. List again on 29.10.2021. RAJESH KUMAR GOEL Registrar

ITEM NO.23 Court 13 (Video Conferencing) SECTION II S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Criminal Appeal No(s). 457/2018 MANJU SURANA Appellant(s) VERSUS RATAN SINGH & ORS. Respondent(s) WITH SLP(Crl) No. 8405-8406/2018 (II-C) IA No. 17222/2020 - ADDITION / DELETION / MODIFICATION PARTIES Date : 22-07-2021 This appeal was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA KANT [IN CHAMBERS] For Appellant(s) Mr. Prashant Bhushan, AOR Mr. Sunil Fernandes, AOR Ms. Nupur Kumar, Adv. Mr. Prastut Dalvi, Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Shiv Mangal Sharma, Adv. Mr. Rohit Yadav, Adv. M/S. Aura & Co., AOR Mr. Merusagar Samantaray, AOR Mr. Gautam Jha, AOR Mr. Manish Sharma, Adv. Mr. Arvind Kumar Sharma, AOR Mr. Nishant Ramakantrao Katneshwarkar, AOR Mr. Nachiketa Joshi, AOR Mr. Rajeev Sharma, AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R The Court is convened through Video Conferencing. Interlocutory Application No. 17222/2020 in SLP(Crl.) Nos. 8405-8406/2018 Interlocutory application is allowed. Name of Respondent No. 6 is deleted from the array of parties at the risk and 1

responsibility of the petitioner(s). Learned counsel for the petitioner seeks and is granted four weeks’ time to effect service on Respondent No. 1 through electronic mode. The served respondents may file their counter affidavit, if any, within six weeks. List the matter after six weeks . (NEETA SAPRA) (RENU BALA GAMBHIR) COURT MASTER (SH) COURT MASTER (NSH) 2

ITEM NO.14 Court 1 (Video Conferencing) 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). 2753/2021 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 17-03-2021 in CRLRP No. 1120/2016 passed by the High Court Of Karnataka At Bengaluru) B.S. YEDIYURAPPA Petitioner(s) VERSUS A. ALAM PASHA & ORS. Respondent(s) (FOR ADMISSION and I.R. ) WITH SLP(Crl) No. 2771-2773/2021 (II-C) (FOR ADMISSION and I.R. and IA No.45642/2021-EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT) Date : 05-04-2021 This petition was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. BOPANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. RAMASUBRAMANIAN For Petitioner(s) Mr. K.V. Vishwanathan,Sr.Adv. Mr. Sandeep Patil,Adv. Mr. Kush Chaturvedi, AOR Ms. Priyashree Sharma Ph,Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. A. P. Mohanty, AOR Ms. Vijay Lakshmi,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Issue notice. In the meantime, there shall be stay of operation of the impugned order as well as stay of further proceedings in the Criminal Case. Tag with SLP(Crl.)No. 520 of 2021. (MADHU BALA) (INDU KUMARI POKHRIYAL) AR-CUM-PS ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

ITEM NO.30 REGISTRAR COURT. 2 THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCE 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 BEFORE THE REGISTRAR SH. RAJIV KALRA Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s). 520/2021 B.S YEDDIYURAPPA Petitioner(s) VERSUS A ALAM PASHA & ORS. Respondent(s) WITH SLP(Crl) No. 758/2021 (II - C) Date : 24 - 03 - 2021 This petition was called on for hearing today. For Petitioner(s) Mr. E. C. Agrawala, AOR Mr. Kush Chaturvedi, AOR Ms. Pr iyashree Sharma Ph, Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. A. P. Mohanty, AOR Ms. Vijay Lakshmi, Adv. Mr. Chandratanay Chaube, Adv. Ms. Srishti Agnihotri, AOR UPON hearing the counsel through Video Conference, the Court made the following O R D E R SLP(Crl) No.520/2021 Respondent Nos.1 & 4 have filed c ounter affidavit. Service deemed complete in respect of Respondent No.2 as the said respondent is appearing as petitioner in connected SLP (Crl) No.758/2021 and represented therein. Notice issued to Respondent No.3 received undelivered with remarks "No s uch person". Two weeks’ time is granted to the learned counsel for the petitioner to take fresh steps and to file fresh particulars for effecting service upon said unserved respondent.

List the matter again on 01.07.2021. SLP(Crl) No.758/2021 No one appeared for Respondent No.2 despite due service. Respondent No.4 has filed counter affidavit. Mr. A.P. Mohanty, learned AOR for respondent(s) submits that he shall file counter affidavit in respect of Respondent No.1 today itself after serving its copy on the other side. Same be filed within four weeks as last chance. Notice issued to Respondent No.3 received undelivered with remarks "No such person". Two weeks’ time is granted to the learned counsel for the petitioner(s) to take fresh steps and to file fresh particulars for effecting service upon said unserved respondent. List the matter again on 01.07.2021. RAJIV KALRA Registrar (RG) (2)

REVISED ITEM NO.9 Court 1 (Video Conferencing) 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). 2318/2021 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 05-01-2021 in CRLP No. 9361/2016 passed by the High Court Of Karnataka At Bengaluru) SHIVASWAMY K.S. Petitioner(s) VERSUS A. ALAM PASHA & ORS. Respondent(s) (FOR ADMISSION and I.R. and IA No.37670/2021-EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT and IA No.37664/2021-PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES ) Date : 24-03-2021 This petition was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. BOPANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. RAMASUBRAMANIAN For Petitioner(s) Ms. Anitha Shenoy, Sr. Adv. Ms. Srishti Agnihotri, AOR Ms. Sanjana Thomas, Adv. Mr. Chandratanay Chaube, Adv. Ms. Anmol Gupta, Adv. Ms. Nupur Raut, Adv. For Respondent(s) MR. A.P. Mohanty,AOR Ms. Vijay Lakshmi,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Issue notice. There shall be stay of arrest in the meantime. Tag with SLP(Crl.)No. 520 of 2021. (MADHU BALA) (INDU KUMARI POKHRIYAL) AR-CUM-PS ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

ITEM NO.9 Court 1 (Video Conferencing) 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). 2318/2021 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 05-01-2021 in CRLP No. 9361/2016 passed by the High Court Of Karnataka At Bengaluru) SHIVASWAMY K.S. Petitioner(s) VERSUS A. ALAM PASHA & ORS. Respondent(s) (FOR ADMISSION and I.R. and IA No.37670/2021-EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT and IA No.37664/2021-PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES ) Date : 24-03-2021 This petition was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. BOPANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. RAMASUBRAMANIAN For Petitioner(s) Ms. Anitha Shenoy, Sr. Adv. Ms. Srishti Agnihotri, AOR Ms. Sanjana Thomas, Adv. Mr. Chandratanay Chaube, Adv. Ms. Anmol Gupta, Adv. Ms. Nupur Raut, Adv. For Respondent(s) MR. AP MOHANTY AOR Ms. Vijay Lakshmi,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Issue notice. Tag with SLP(Crl.)No. 520 of 2021. (MADHU BALA) (INDU KUMARI POKHRIYAL) AR-CUM-PS ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

ITEM NO.10+17 Court 1 (Video Conferencing) 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. 520/2021 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 05-01-2021 in CRLP No. 9361/2016 passed by the High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru) B.S YEDDIYURAPPA Petitioner(s) VERSUS A ALAM PASHA & ORS. Respondent(s) (FOR ADMISSION) WITH SLP (Crl.) No. 758/2021 (FOR ADMISSION and I.R. and I.A. No. 10975/2021-PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES) Date : 27-01-2021 These petitions were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. BOPANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. RAMASUBRAMANIAN For Petitioner(s) Mr. Mukul Rohatgi, Sr. Adv. Mr. Sajjan Povayya, Sr. Adv. Mr. Mahesh Agarwal, Adv. Mr. Mrinal Shankar, Adv. Mr. Saransh Jain, Adv. Mr. Pratibhanu, Adv. Ms. Shloka Shankar, Adv. Mr. Himanshu Satija, Adv. Mr. E. C. Agrawala, AOR Mr. Mukul Rohatgi, Sr. Adv. Mr. K. V. Vishwanathan, Sr. Adv. Mr. Sandeep Patil, Adv. Mr. Kush Chaturvedi, AOR Ms. Priyashree Sharma Ph, Adv. Mr. Venkatraman Amartya Sharan, Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. A. P. Mohanty, AOR Ms. Vijay Lakshmi, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Issue notice. There shall be stay of arrest in the meantime. (NIDHI AHUJA) (INDU KUMARI POKHRIYAL) AR-cum-PS ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

ITEM NO.3 Court 11 (Video Conferencing) 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).3567-3568/2017 SHAMIM KHAN Petitioner(s) VERSUS DEBASHISH CHAKRABARTY & ORS. Respondent(s) WITH SLP(Crl) No. 4608/2017 (II-A) SLP(Crl) No. 4607/2017 (II-A) SLP(Crl) No. 4606/2017 (II-A) Date : 23-11-2020 These petitions were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAN M. SHANTANAGOUDAR [IN CHAMBER] For Petitioner(s) Mr. Pukhrambam Ramesh Kumar, AOR Ms. Anupama Ng., Adv. Mr. Karun Sharma, Adv. Mr. Mohit D. Ram, AOR For Respondent(s) Mr. Uday B. Dube, AOR Mr. Ashish Wad, Adv. Mrs. Tamali Wad, Adv. Mr. Sidharth Mahajan, Adv. Ms. Sukriti Jaggi, Adv. Mr. Ajeyo Sharma, Adv. For M/S. J S Wad And Co, AOR Mr. Sachin Patil, AOR Mr. Balaji Srinivasan, AOR Mr. Dhiraj, Adv. Mr. P.N. Puri, AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Learned counsel for the petitioner prays for and is granted

2 four weeks further time finally to file fresh address of Respondent No.2 in SLP (Crl.) No.3567-3568/2017. Learned counsel for the petitioner seeks leave of this Court to file proof of dasti service in respect of Respondent Nos.4 and 7 in SLP (Crl.) No. 4608/2017 and Respondent Nos. 2 to 6 in SLP (Crl.) No.4606/2017. Learned counsel for the petitioner is granted four weeks further time finally to file fresh and correct address of Respondent Nos.2 to 5 as they are not presently working with the Slum Rehabilitation Authority. (GULSHAN KUMAR ARORA) (R.S. NARAYANAN) AR-CUM-PS COURT MASTER

ITEM NO.19 Virtual Court 3 SECTION II-B 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). 2241/2020 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 28-11-2019 in SCRA No. 4333/2016 passed by the High Court Of Gujarat At Ahmedabad) SANJAY JAGDISHBHAI BHATY Petitioner(s) VERSUS THE STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR. Respondent(s) (FOR ADMISSION and I.R. and IA No.45037/2020-EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT and IA No.45038/2020-EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T.) Date : 04-06-2020 This petition was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN SINHA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B.R. GAVAI For Petitioner(s) Mr. Devadatt Kamat, Sr. Adv. Mr. Rajesh Inamdar, Adv. Mr. Ali Ashgar Rahim, Adv. Mr. Gautam Talukdar, AOR Ms. Javedur Rahman, Adv. Mr. Aditya Bhat, Adv. For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Applications seeking exemption from filing Official Translation and Certified Copy of the impugned order are allowed. Issue notice. Tag with Criminal Appeal No. 457 of 2018. (R. NATARAJAN) (NISHA TRIPATHI) ASTT. REGISTRAR-cum-PS BRANCH OFFICER

ITEM NO.22 Virtual Court No.5 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 SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRIMINAL) Diary No(s). 5152/2020 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 01-11- 2018 in CRLOP No. 23523/2018 01-11-2018 in CRLOP No. 23530/2018 01-11-2018 in CRLOP No. 23531/2018 01-11-2018 in CRLOP No. 23533/2018 passed by the High Court Of Judicature At Madras) THE DIRECTOR GENERAL (VIG) AND CVO Petitioner(s) VERSUS STATE THROUGH THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE & ORS. Respondent(s) (With applications for c/delay in filing and exemption from filing c/c of the impugned judgment, for permission to file Special Leave Petition) Date : 26-05-2020 This petition was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE L. NAGESWARA RAO HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KRISHNA MURARI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT For Petitioner(s) Sanjay Jain, ASG Abhishek Kumar, Adv Mr. B. Krishna Prasad, AOR For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Issue notice on the application for condonation of delay as well as on the Special Leave Petition. Tag along with SLP (Crl.) No.3232 of 2019. (GEETA AHUJA) (ANAND PRAKASH) COURT MASTER (SH) BRANCH OFFICER

1 ITEM NO.6 COURT NO.14 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). 3567- 3568/2017 SHAMIM KHAN Petitioner(s) VERSUS DEBASHISH CHAKRABARTY & ORS. Respondent(s) WITH SLP(Crl) No. 4608/2017 (II-A) SLP(Crl) No. 4607/2017 (II-A) SLP(Crl) No. 4606/2017 (II-A) Date : 02-03-2020 These petitions were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. ABDUL NAZEER [IN CHAMBER] For Petitioner(s) Mr. Pukhrambam Ramesh Kumar, AOR Ms. Anupama Ngangom, Adv. Mr. Karun Sharma, Adv. Mr. V. Madhukar, Adv. Mr. Monisha Handa, Adv. Mr. Mohit D. Ram, AOR Mr. Sachin Kaushal, Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Uday B. Dube, AOR Mr. Sidharth Mahajan, Adv. Mr. Ajeyo Sharma, Adv. Mr. Ashish Wad, Adv. Mrs. Jayashree Wad, Adv. M/S. J S Wad And Co, AOR Mr. Sachin Patil, AOR

2 Mr. Balaji Srinivasan, AOR Mr. P. N. Puri, AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Six weeks’ time is granted to the learned counsel for the petitioner to do the needful. (NEELAM GULATI) (RAJINDER KAUR) AR cum PS ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

ITEM NO.3 COURT NO.6 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 for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) Nos.3567-3568/2017 SHAMIM KHAN Petitioner(s) VERSUS DEBASHISH CHAKRABARTY & ORS. Respondent(s) WITH SLP(Crl) No. 4608/2017 (II-A) SLP(Crl) No. 4607/2017 (II-A) SLP(Crl) No. 4606/2017 (II-A) Date : 14-02-2020 These petitions were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH MAHESHWARI [IN CHAMBERS] For Petitioner(s) V. Mudhukar, ADV. Mr. Mohit D. Ram, AOR Ms. Monisha Handa, Adv. Mr. Sachin Kaushal, Adv. Mr. Pukhrambam Ramesh Kumar, AOR For Respondent(s) Mr. Uday B. Dube, AOR Mr. Seshatalpa Sai, Adv. Mr. Sachin Patil, AOR Mr. Ashish Wad, Adv. Mrs. Jaysree Wad, Adv. Mr. Ajeyo Sharma, Adv. M/S. J S Wad And Co, AOR Mr. Balaji Srinivasan, AOR Mr. P. N. Puri, AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R As prayed for, two weeks time is granted to do the needful. (RACHNA) (DIPTI KHURANA) SENIOR PERSONAL ASSISTANT COURT MASTER (NSH)

ITEM NO.7.1 and 7.2 1 REGISTRAR COURT. 2 SECTION II S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE REGISTRAR SH. RAJIV KALRA Criminal Appeal No(s). 457/2018 MANJU SURANA Appellant(s) VERSUS RATAN SINGH & ORS. Respondent(s) (ONLY SLP (CRL) NO. 265/2019 AND SLP(CRL.) 8405 - 06 OF 2018 TO BE LISTED ON 5.2.2020 FOR SE RVICE COMPLIANCE. ) WITH SLP(Crl) No. 8405 - 8406/2018 (II - C) SLP(Crl) No. 265/2019 (II - C) Date : 05 - 02 - 2020 This appeal was called on for hearing today. For Appellant(s) Mr. Chandra Bhushan Prasad, AOR Mr. Sunil Fernandes, AOR Mr. Prastut Dalvi,Adv. Mr. Prashant Bhushan, AOR For Respondent(s) Mr. Chirag M. Shroff, AOR Ms. Abilasha Bharti,Adv. Mr. Merusagar Samantaray, A OR Mr. Gautam Jha, AOR Mr. Nishant Ramakantrao Katneshwarkar, AOR Mr. Nachiketa Joshi, AOR Ms. Sucheta Joshi,Adv. Ms. Himadri Haksar,Adv. Mr. Rajeev Sharma, AOR

ITEM NO.7.1 and 7.2 2 UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R SLP(Crl) Nos. 8405 - 8406/2018 Await the return of the service of notice already issued to the respondent Nos. 1 to 5. Application for deletion of respondent No. 6 from the array of the parties be processed for listing before the Hon'ble Judge in Chambers for further future directions. Await orders. List thereafter. SLP(Crl) No. 265/2019 Ld. Counsel for the responde nt No.1 has not filed any counter affidavit despite grant of last chance. Service of notice is complete qua respondent Nos. 3 and 4 but no one has entered appearance on their behalf. Two weeks’ time, as last chance, is given to learned counsel for petit ioners to comply with the terms of the order dated 28.11.2019 of this Court in respect of respondent Nos.2 and 5. List again on 07.4.2020. RAJIV KALRA Registrar MG

1 ITEM NO.19 COURT NO.9 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).3232/2019 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 01-11- 2018 in CRLOP No. 23531/2018 passed by the High Court Of Judicature At Madras) NAMONARAYAN MEENA Petitioner(s) VERSUS STATE THROUGH THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE CBI/ACB/CHENNAI Respondent(s) ( IA No. 138102/2019 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 52398/2019 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT) Date : 09-01-2020 This petition was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE L. NAGESWARA RAO HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA For Petitioner(s) Mr. Rishi Malhotra, AOR Mr. Utkarsh Singh, Adv. Mr. Ramnath, Adv. Ms. Poonam Anand, Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Sanjay Kumar Tyagi, Adv. Mr. Rajesh Kumar Singh,Adv. Mr. Arvind Kumar Sharma, Adv. Mr. Divyansh Rai, Adv. Mr. K. Subramanian, Sr. Adv. Mr. E.C.Agrawala, AOR Mr. Rajesh Kumar, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission to implead Commissioner of Customs, Office of Commissioner of Customs, C/o 60 Rajaji Salai, Custom House, Chennai – 8, Tamil

2 Nadu. An application may be filed to that effect. I.A. No.138102/2019 filed by Respondent No.2 is for a direction that the hearing of Crl. O.P. No.8561 of 2019 filed by him may be taken up by the High Court notwithstanding the pendency of this Special Leave Petition. We request the High Court to decide Crl. O.P. No.8561 of 2019 for quashing the FIR without reference to the pendency of this Special Leave Petition. List after two weeks. (GEETA AHUJA) (ANAND PRAKASH) COURT MASTER (SH) BRANCH OFFICER

ITEM NO.17 REGISTRAR COURT. 2 SECTION II S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE REGISTRAR SH. SURINDER S. RATHI Criminal Appeal No(s). 457/2018 MANJU SURANA Appellant(s) VERSUS RATAN SINGH & ORS. Respond ent(s) (ONLY SLP (CRL) NO. 265/2019 AND SLP(CRL.) 8405 - 06 OF 2018 TO BE LISTED ON 28.11.2019 FOR SERVICE COMPLIANCE. ) WITH SLP(Crl) No. 8405 - 8406/2018 (II - C) SLP(Crl) No. 265/2019 (II - C) Date : 28 - 11 - 2019 This appeal was called on for hearing today . For Appellant(s) Mr. Sunil Fernandes, AOR Mr. Darpan Sachdeva, Adv. Mr. Prashant Bhushan, AOR Mr. Chandra Bhushan Prasad, AOR Ms. Ekta Rani, Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Chirag M. Shroff, AOR Mr. Merusagar Samantaray, AOR Mr. Gautam Jha, AOR Mr. Nishant Ramakantrao Katneshwarkar, AOR Mr. Nachiketa Joshi, AO R Mr. Rajeev Sharma, AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Appearance :Ld. counsel for petitioner is present. None appeared for the Responden t. SLP(Crl) No. 8405 - 8406/2018 Ld. counsel for the petitioner shall within a period of four weeks file the fresh particulars of Respondent Nos. 1 and 6 within the same period.

ITEM NO.17 REGISTRAR COURT. 2 SECTION II Ld. Counsel for the Petitioner shall file one more spare copy within a period of two weeks as a last chance. List again on 05.02.2020. SLP(Crl) No. 265/2019 Respondent No. 1 has not filed counter affidavit despite grant of last opportunity. Service is complete upon respondent Nos. 3 and 4, but no one has entered appearance on their behalf. Notice could not be served to Respondent Nos. 2 and 5 as postal remarks shows “incomplete” and “left” respectively. Hence, Ld. counsel for t he petitioner shall file the fresh particulars of the above respondents and he shall also take fresh steps for the service of notice to them within a period of four weeks. List again on 05.02.2020. SURI NDER S. RATHI Registrar pm

ITEM NO.29 REGISTRAR COURT. 1 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 BEFORE THE REGISTRAR SH. ANIL LAXMAN PANSARE Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s). 3567- 3568/2017 SHAMIM KHAN Petitioner(s) VERSUS DEBASHISH CHAKRABARTY & ORS. Respondent(s) WITH SLP(Crl) No. 4608/2017 (II-A) SLP(Crl) No. 4607/2017 (II-A) SLP(Crl) No. 4606/2017 (II-A) Date : 26-11-2019 These petitions were called on for hearing today. For Petitioner(s) Mr. Karun Sharma, Adv. Mr. Pukhrambam Ramesh Kumar, AOR Mr. Mohit D. Ram, AOR For Respondent(s) Mr. Shareef K.A., Adv. Mr. Uday B. Dube, AOR Mr. Ashish Wad, Adv. Mrs. Jayashree Wad, Adv. Mr. Sidharth Mahajan, Adv. Ms. Sukriti Jaggi, Adv. Mr. Ajeyo Sharma, Adv. M/S. J S Wad And Co, AOR Mr. Seshatalpa Sai Bandaru, Adv. Mr. Nishant Ramakantrao Katneshwarkar, AOR Mr. P. N. Puri, AOR Mr. Balaji Srinivasan, AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R SLP(Crl.) No. 3567-3568/2017,SLP(Crl) No. 4608/2017, SLP(Crl) No. 4607/2017 and SLP(Crl) No. 4606/2017 Ld. Advocate, Mr. Seshatalpa Sai Bandaru, appearing on behalf of Mr.Nishant R. Katneshwarkar, Advocate-on-record

Item No.29 -2- appears for respondent No.3 in SLP(Crl.) No. 3567-3568/2017, respondent No.7 in SLP(Crl) No. 4608/2017, respondent No.3 in SLP(Crl) No. 4607/2017 and respondent No.6 in SLP(Crl) No.4606/2017. He seeks time to file vakalatnama and counter affidavit. Be filed within four weeks. Ld. Counsel for the petitioner to take fresh steps alongwith fresh particulars of respondent No.2 within two weeks, as last opportunity. If fresh steps are not taken with fresh particulars within two weeks, Registry to process the matter for listing before the Hon’ble Judge in Chamber for orders. If fresh steps are taken with fresh particulars within two weeks, be processed as per rules. SLP(Crl.) No. 4606-4608/2017 None appeared for the petitioner when called. Despite last opportunity, affidavit of dasti service in respect of respondent Nos.4 and 7 in SLP(Crl) No. 4608/2017, respondent Nos.2 and 3 in SLP(Crl) No. 4607/2017, and respondent Nos.2 to 6 in SLP(Crl) No. 4606/2017, has not been filed. Registry to process the matter for listing before the Hon’ble Judge in Chamber for orders. ANIL LAXMAN PANSARE Registrar

ITEM NO.47 REGISTRAR COURT. 2 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 BEFORE THE REGISTRAR SURINDER S. RATHI Criminal Appeal No(s). 457/2018 (ONLY SLP (CRL) NO. 265/2019 TO BE LISTED AGAINST THIS MATTER. ) Deepak Kumar @ Deepak Kumar Saha Appellant(s) VERSUS State (NCT of Delhi) & Anr. Respondent(s) Date : 05-09-2019 This appeal was called on for hearing today. For Appellant(s) Mr. Chandra Bhushan Prasad, AOR (Not Present) For Respondent(s) Mr. Chirag M. Shroff, AOR (Not Present) Ms. Mahima C. Shroff, Adv. (Not Present) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R SLP (CRL) NO. 265/2019 None appeared for the parties. Four weeks’ time as a last chance is granted to Respondent No. 1 to file Counter Affidavit. Registry to issue notice to Respondent Nos. 2 to 5 urgently. List again on 07.11.2019. SURINDER S. RATHI Registrar pm

ITEM NO.18 COURT NO.14 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). 3232/2019 NAMONARAYAN MEENA Petitioner(s) VERSUS STATE THROUGH THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE CBI/ACB/CHENNAI Respondent(s) (IA No. 119639/2019 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT) Date : 26-08-2019 This matter was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.R. SHAH [IN CHAMBERS] For Petitioner(s) Mr. Utkarsh Singh, Adv. Mr. Rishi Malhotra, AOR For Respondent(s) Mr. K. Subramanian, Sr. Adv. Ms. Neha Agarwal, Adv. Mr. E. C. Agrawala, AOR Mr. Sunil Murarka, Adv. Mr. Rajesh K. Singh, Adv. Mr. Arwind K. Sharma, AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R IA No. 119639/2019 - (Application for impleadment) is allowed. Learned counsel for the C.B.I. has already entered his appearance. Registry to process the matter further. (TUSHAR BISHT) (RENU KAPOOR) SENIOR PERSONAL ASSISTANT BRANCH OFFICER

ITEM NO.802 COURT NO.10 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).3232/2019 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 01-11- 2018 in CRLOP No. 23531/2018 passed by the High Court Of Judicature At Madras) NAMONARAYAN MEENA Petitioner(s) VERSUS STATE THROUGH THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE CBI/ACB/CHENNAI Respondent(s) (I.A.No.119639/2019 i.e application for impleadment is to be listed. ) Date : 22-08-2019 This petition was mentioned today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE L. NAGESWARA RAO HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA For Petitioner(s) Mr. Rishi Malhotra, AOR For Respondent(s) Mr. E. C. Agrawala, AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Taken on board. Not to be deleted from 26 th August, 2019. (GEETA AHUJA) (SUNIL KUMAR RAJVANSHI) COURT MASTER (SH) BRANCH OFFICER

ITEM NO.23 REGISTRAR COURT. 1 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 BEFORE THE REGISTRAR ANIL LAXMAN PANSARE Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s). 3567- 3568/2017 SHAMIM KHAN Petitioner(s) VERSUS DEBASHISH CHAKRABARTY & ORS. Respondent(s) WITH SLP(Crl) No. 4608/2017 (II-A) SLP(Crl) No. 4607/2017 (II-A) SLP(Crl) No. 4606/2017 (II-A) Date : 31-07-2019 These petitions were called on for hearing today. For Petitioner(s) Mr. Pukhrambam Ramesh Kumar, AOR Mr V Madhukar, Adv. Ms Monisha Handa, Adv. Mr. Mohit D. Ram, AOR For Respondent(s) Mr. Uday B. Dube, AOR Mr Ashish Wad, Adv. Mrs Jayashree Wad, Adv. Mr Sidharth Mahajan, Adv. Ms Sukriti Jaggi, Adv. M/S. J S Wad And Co, AOR Ms Shubhada Phaltankar, Adv. Mr. Nishant Ramakantrao Katneshwarkar, AOR Mr. Balaji Srinivasan, AOR Mr. P. N. Puri, AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R SLP(Crl) No 3567-3568/2017 Ld. Counsel for the petitioner to take fresh steps to effect service on respondent no.2 within two weeks time.

-2- Item no.23 SLP(Crl) No.4608, 4607, 4606 of 2017 Ld. Counsel for the petitioner is granted four weeks time as last opportunity for filing affidavit of dasti service in respect of respondent nos. 4 and 7 in SLP(Crl) No.4608/2017, respondent nos. 2 and 3 in SLP(Crl) No.4607/2017 and respondent nos. 2 to 6 in SLP(Crl) No.4606/2017. List again on 26.11.2019. ANIL LAXMAN PANSARE Registrar

ITEM NO.7 REGISTRAR COURT. 2 SECTION II S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE REGISTRAR SURINDER S. RATHI Criminal Appeal No(s). 457/2018 MANJU SURANA Appellant(s) VERSUS RATAN SINGH & ORS. Respondent(s) (HEARD BY HONBLE J. CHELAMESWAR AND HONBLE SANJAY KISHAN KAUL ,JJ., Only SR 8405-06/18 to be listed before the Court of Ld. Registrar for service compliance. (order dt 14.5.2019/file). ) WITH SLP(Crl) No. 8405-8406/2018 (II-C) Date : 26-07-2019 This appeal was called on for hearing today. For Appellant(s) Mr.Zeeshan Diwan,Adv. Mr. Sunil Fernandes, AOR Mr. Prashant Bhushan, AOR For Respondent(s) Mr. Merusagar Samantaray, AOR Mr. Gautam Jha, AOR Mr. Nishant Ramakantrao Katneshwarkar, AOR Mr. Nachiketa Joshi, AOR Mr. Rajeev Sharma, AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R SLP(Crl) No. 8405-8406/2018 Unserved cover containing the notice has been received back from respondent Nos.1 & 6 with postal remarks “No such person”. Ld.counsel for the petitioner, shall within a period of four weeks, file the fresh particulars of the above respondents and he shall also take fresh steps for the service of notice to them within the same period. …..2

ITEM NO.7 -2- Ld.counsel for the petitioner is directed to take fresh steps in respect of respondent Nos.2-5 within two weeks. List the matter again on 28.11.2019. SURINDER S. RATHI Registrar SB

ITEM NO.21 REGISTRAR COURT. 1 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 BEFORE THE REGISTRAR ANIL LAXMAN PANSARE Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s). 3567-3568/2017 SHAMIM KHAN Petitioner(s) VERSUS DEBASHISH CHAKRABARTY & ORS. Respondent(s) WITH SLP(Crl) No. 4608/2017 (II-A) SLP(Crl) No. 4607/2017 (II-A) SLP(Crl) No. 4606/2017 (II-A) Date : 07-05-2019 These petitions were called on for hearing today. For Petitioner(s) Mr V Madhukar, Adv. Ms Monisha Handa, Adv. Mr. Mohit D. Ram, AOR Ms Sanjana Srikumar, Adv. Mr. Pukhrambam Ramesh Kumar, AOR For Respondent(s) Mr Ashish Wad, Adv. Mrs Jayashree Wad, Adv. Mr Sidharth Mahajan, Adv. Ms Sukriti Jaggi, Adv. M/S. J S Wad And Co, AOR Mr. P. N. Puri, AOR Mr. Uday B. Dube, AOR Mr Seshatalpa Sai Bandaru, Adv. Mr. Nishant Ramakantrao Katneshwarkar, AOR Mr. Balaji Srinivasan, AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R SLP(Crl) No.3567-3568/2017 Respondent nos. 1 and 3 to 5 are duly represented.

-2- Item no.21 Await service/track report in respect of respondent no.2. SLP(Crl) No. 4608/2017 Ld. Counsel for the petitioner is granted four weeks time for filing affidavit of dasti service in respect of respondent nos. 4 to 7. However, Ld. Counsel, Mr Seshatalpa Sai Bandaru appearing on behalf of Mr Nishant R Katneshwarkar, Advocate-on-record appears for the respondent- State of Maharashtra. Vakalatnama be filed within two weeks time. SLP(Crl) No. 4607/2017 Respondent no.1 has filed counter affidavit. Ld. Counsel for the petitioner is granted four weeks time for filing affidavit of dasti service in respect of respondent nos. 2 and 3. However, Ld. Counsel, Mr Seshatalpa Sai Bandaru appearing on behalf of Mr Nishant R Katneshwarkar, Advocate-on-record appears for the respondent- State of Maharashtra. Vakalatnama be filed within two weeks time. SLP(Crl) No. 4606/2017 Ld. Counsel for the petitioner is granted four weeks time for filing affidavit of dasti service in respect of respondent nos. 2 to 6. However, Ld. Counsel, Mr Seshatalpa Sai Bandaru appearing on behalf of Mr Nishant R Katneshwarkar, Advocate-on-record appears for the respondent- State of Maharashtra. Vakalatnama be filed within two weeks time. List again on 31.7.2019. ANIL LAXMAN PANSARE Registrar

ITEM NO.8 REGISTRAR COURT. 2 SECTION II S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE REGISTRAR RAJESH KUMAR GOEL Criminal Appeal No(s). 457/2018 MANJU SURANA Appellant(s) VERSUS RATAN SINGH & ORS. Respondent(s) (HEARD BY HONBLE J. CHELAMESWAR AND HONBLE SANJAY KISHAN KAUL ,JJ., Only SR265/19 to be listed before the Court of Ld. Registrar for service compliance. (order dt 21.2.2019/file) ) WITH SLP(Crl) No. 265/2019 (II-C) Date : 11-04-2019 This appeal was called on for hearing today. For Appellant(s) Mr. Prashant Bhushan, AOR Mr. Chandra Bhushan Prasad, AOR For Respondent(s) Mr. Nachiketa Joshi, AOR Mr. Rajeev Sharma, AOR Mr. Merusagar Samantaray, AOR Mr. Gautam Jha, AOR Mr. Nishant Ramakantrao Katneshwarkar, AOR Mr.Chirag M.Shroof,Adv. Ms.Neha Sangwan,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R SLP(Crl) No. 265/2019 The unserved cover containing the notice has been received back from the respondent Nos.2-5 with postal remarks “No such person”. Hence, Ld.counsel for the petitioner shall file the fresh particulars of the above respondents and he shall also take fresh steps for the service of notice to them within a period of four weeks. ……...2

ITEM NO.8 -2- Respondent No.1 is granted four weeks’ time, to file counter affidavit. List the matter again on 05.09.2019. RAJESH KUMAR GOEL Registrar SB

ITEM NO.39 COURT NO.13 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 SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRIMINAL) Diary No(s). 10333/2019 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 01-11-2018 in CRLOP No. 23531/2018 passed by the High Court Of Judicature At Madras) NAMONARAYAN MEENA Petitioner(s) VERSUS STATE THROUGH THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE CBI/ACB/CHENNAIRespondent(s) (FOR ADMISSION and I.R. and IA No.52397/2019-CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING and IA No.52398/2019-EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT) Date : 05-04-2019 This petition was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE L. NAGESWARA RAO HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.R. SHAH For Petitioner(s) Mr. Rishi Malhotra, AOR For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Delay condoned. Issue notice. There shall be stay of the impugned order, in the meantime. (ASHWANI KUMAR) (KAILASH CHANDER) COURT MASTER (SH) ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

ITEM NO.47 COURT NO.9 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). 3567-3568/2017 SHAMIM KHAN Petitioner(s) VERSUS DEBASHISH CHAKRABARTY & ORS. Respondent(s) WITH SLP(Crl) No. 4608/2017 (II-A) SLP(Crl) No. 4607/2017 (II-A) SLP(Crl) No. 4606/2017 (II-A) Date : 01-04-2019 These petitions were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY RASTOGI [IN CHAMBER] For Petitioner(s) Mr. V. Madhukar, Adv. Mr. Mohit D. Ram, AOR Mr. M. Handu, Adv. Mr. Pukhrambam Ramesh Kumar, AOR For Respondent(s) Mr. Ashish Wad, Adv. Ms. Priti Purandare, Adv. Ms. Jayashree Wad, Adv. Mr. Sidharth Mahajan, Adv. Ms. Sukriti Jaggi, Adv. M/S. J S Wad And Co, AOR Mr. P. N. Puri, AOR Mr. Uday B. Dube, AOR Mr. Nishant Ramakantrao Katneshwarkar, AOR Mr. Abhishek B., Adv. Mr. Balaji Srinivasan, AOR

UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R SLP(Crl) No. 3567-3568/2017 Learned counsel submits that fresh correct particulars of unserved respondent no. 2 has been furnished in the Registry. Delay,if any, in filing such particulars is condoned. SLP(Crl) No. 4608/2017, SLP(Crl) No. 4607/2017 & SLP(Crl) No. 4606/2017 Learned counsel seeks some time to comply with the office report. List after four weeks. (ASHWANI THAKUR) (VIDYA NEGI) COURT MASTER (SH) COURT MASTER (NSH)

ITEM NO.49 COURT NO.5 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 for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) Nos.3567-3568/2017 SHAMIM KHAN Petitioner(s) VERSUS DEBASHISH CHAKRABARTY & ORS. ETC.ETC. Respondent(s) WITH SLP(Crl) No. 4608/2017 (II-A) SLP(Crl) No. 4607/2017 (II-A) SLP(Crl) No. 4606/2017 (II-A) Date : 11-02-2019 These petitions were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINEET SARAN [IN CHAMBERS] For Petitioner(s) Mr. V. Madhukar, Adv. Ms. M. Handa, Adv. For Mr. Mohit D. Ram, AOR Mr. Pukhrambam Ramesh Kumar, AOR For Respondent(s) Mr. Ashish Wad, Adv. Mrs. Jayashree Wad, Adv. Mr. Sidharth Mahajan, Adv. Ms. Sukrity Jaggi, Adv. For M/S. J S Wad And Co, AOR Mr. P. N. Puri, AOR Mr. Uday B. Dube, AOR Mr. Nishant Ramakantrao Katneshwarkar, AOR Mr. Balaji Srinivasan, AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R As prayed for, list the matter after four weeks. (RACHNA) (HARI SWAROOP PARASHER) SENIOR PERSONAL ASSISTANT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

ITEM NO.35 COURT NO.1 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 SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRIMINAL) Diary No.43108/2018 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 08-08-2018 in CRLMC No. 664/2015 passed by the High Court Of Delhi at New Delhi) DEEPAK KUMAR @ DEEPAK KUMAR SAHA Petitioner(s) VERSUS STATE (NCT OF DELHI) & ORS. Respondent(s) (With appln.(s) for c/delay in filing SLP, exemption from filing O.T. and permission to file additional documents/facts/Annexures) Date : 07-01-2019 This petition was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KISHAN KAUL For Petitioner(s) Mr. Siddharth Dave, Adv. Ms. Priya Hingorani, Adv. Mr. Chandra Bhushan Prasad, AOR Mr. Akhand Pratap Singh, Adv. Ms. Aditi Mittal, Adv. Bahul Kalra, Adv. For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Delay condoned. Issue notice. Tag with Criminal Appeal Nos.457/2018 and 458/2018. (Chetan Kumar) (Anand Prakash) A.R.-cum-P.S. Court Master

1 ITEM NO.40 COURT NO.10 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). 3567- 3568/2017 SHAMIM KHAN Petitioner(s) VERSUS DEBASHISH CHAKRABARTY & ORS. Respondent(s) WITH SLP(Crl) No. 4608/2017 (II-A) SLP(Crl) No. 4607/2017 (II-A) SLP(Crl) No. 4606/2017 (II-A) Date : 12-12-2018 These petitions were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.R. SHAH [IN CHAMBER] For Petitioner(s) Ms. Monisha Handa, Adv. Mr. Mohit D. Ram, AOR Mr. Pukhrambam Ramesh Kumar, AOR For Respondent(s) Mr. Ashish Wad, Adv. Ms. Jayashree Wad, Adv. Mr. Sidharth Mahajan, Adv. Ms. Sukriti Jaggi, Adv. M/S. J S Wad And Co, AOR Mr. P. N. Puri, AOR Mr. Uday B. Dube, AOR Mr. Nishant Ramakantrao Katneshwarkar, AOR Mr. Balaji Srinivasan, AOR

2 UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Four weeks’ time is granted to do the needful. (NEELAM GULATI) (SAROJ KUMARI GAUR) COURT MASTER (SH) BRANCH OFFICER

ITEM NO.35 COURT NO.1 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). 8405- 8406/2018 (ARISING OUT OF IMPUGNED FINAL JUDGMENT AND ORDER DATED 08-08-2018 IN CRLMC NO. 3886/2015 AND CRLMA NO. 13819/2015 PASSED BY THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI) SRIJANA SHRESHA ADVOCATE PETITIONER(S) VERSUS KHAJAN SINGH & ORS. RESPONDENT(S) (FOR ADMISSION AND I.R. AND IA NO.142681/2018-EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT) Date : 02-11-2018 These petitions were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.M. JOSEPH HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA For Petitioner(s) Mr. Anoop George Chaudhari, Sr. Adv. Mr. Sunil Fernandes, AOR Mr. Devdutt Kamat, Adv. Ms. Priyansha Indra Sharma, Adv. Mr. Javedur Rahman, Adv. For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the relevant material. Exemption from filing certified copy of the impugned order is granted. Issue notice, to be heard along with Criminal Appeal No.457 of 2018. [VINOD LAKHINA] [ASHA SONI] AR-cum-PS ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

ITEM NO.29 REGISTRAR COURT. 1 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 BEFORE THE REGISTRAR SURYA PRATAP SINGH Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s). 3567-3568/2017 SHAMIM KHAN Petitioner(s) VERSUS DEBASHISH CHAKRABARTY & ORS. Respondent(s) WITH SLP(Crl) No. 4608/2017 (II-A) SLP(Crl) No. 4607/2017 (II-A) SLP(Crl) No. 4606/2017 (II-A) Date : 11-10-2018 These petitions were called on for hearing today. For Petitioner(s) Mr. Mohit D. Ram, AOR Mr. K. Amrit Kumar Sharma, Adv. Mr. Pukhrambam Ramesh Kumar, AOR For Respondent(s) Mr. Ashish Wad, Adv. Mrs. Jayashree Wad, Adv. Mr. Sidharth Mahajan, Adv. Ms. Sukriti Jaggi, Adv. M/S. J S Wad And Co, AOR Mr. P. N. Puri, AOR Mr. Sagar P. Patil, Adv. Mr. Uday B. Dube, AOR Mr. Anoop Kandari, Adv. Mr. Nishant Ramakantrao Katneshwarkar, AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R SLP(Crl.) No.3567-3568/2017 Respondent Nos.1, 3 and 4 have not filed counter affidavit, despite last opportunity. Further opportunity is declined. However, the Ld. Counsel appearing for respondent

Item No.29 -2- Nos.3 and 4 submits that he does not wish to file counter affidavit. Service is complete on respondent No.5. The Ld. Advocate, Mr. M.H. Khan appears for respondent No.5. He seeks time to file vakalatnama and counter affidavit. Be filed within four weeks. Despite last opportunity, fresh steps for service of respondent No.2 have not been taken. Registry to process the matter for listing before the Hon'ble Judge in Chambers for appropriate orders. SLP(Crl) No. 4608/2017 Respondent Nos.1 to 3 and 6 have already filed counter affidavit. Respondent No.5 has not filed counter affidavit, despite last and final opportunity having been granted. Further opportunity is declined. Despite last opportunity, fresh steps for service of respondent Nos.4 and 7 have not been taken. Registry to process the matter for listing before the Hon'ble Judge in Chambers for appropriate orders. SLP(Crl) No. 4607/2017 Respondent No.1 has already filed counter affidavit. Despite last opportunity, fresh steps for service of respondent Nos.2 and 3 have not been taken. Registry to process the matter for listing before the Hon'ble Judge in Chambers for appropriate orders.

Item No.29 -3- SLP(Crl) No. 4606/2017 Respondent No.1 has not filed counter affidavit, despite last opportunity having been granted. Further opportunity is declined. Despite last opportunity, fresh steps for service of respondent Nos.2 to 6 have not been taken. Registry to process the matter for listing before the Hon'ble Judge in Chambers for appropriate orders. SURYA PRATAP SINGH Registrar

ITEM NO.53 REGISTRAR COURT. 1 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 BEFORE THE REGISTRAR MR. KAPIL MEHTA IA 6532/2017, in Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s). 3567-3568/2017 SHAMIM KHAN Petitioner(s) VERSUS DEBASHISH CHAKRABARTY & ORS. Respondent(s) WITH SLP(Crl) No. 4608/2017 (II-A) SLP(Crl) No. 4607/2017 (II-A) SLP(Crl) No. 4606/2017 (II-A) Date : 21-08-2018 These matters were called on for hearing today. For Petitioner(s) Mr. V. Madhukar, Adv. Mr. Mohit D. Ram, AOR Mr. K. Amrit Kumar Sharma, Adv. Mr. Pukhrambam Ramesh Kumar, AOR For Respondent(s) Mr. Ashish Wad, Adv. Mrs.Jayashree Wad, Adv. Mr. Sidharth Mahajan, Adv. Ms. Sukriti Jaggi, Adv. M/S. J S Wad And Co, AOR Mr. P. N. Puri, AOR Mr. Uday B. Dube, AOR Ms. Shubhada Phaltankar, Adv. Mr. Nishant Ramakantrao Katneshwarkar, AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R SLP(Crl.) No.3567-3568/2017 Four weeks' time, as last opportunity, is granted to respondent Nos.1, 3 and 4 for filing counter affidavit. Service is complete on respondent No.5 but none has entered appearance.

Item No.53 -2- The Ld. Counsel for the petitioner to take fresh steps for service of respondent No.2 within two weeks, as last opportunity. Notice thereafter be issued. SLP(Crl) No. 4608/2017 Respondent Nos.1 to 3 and 6 have already filed counter affidavit. Four weeks' time, as last opportunity, is granted to respondent No.5 for filing counter affidavit. The Ld. Counsel for the petitioner to take fresh steps for service of respondent Nos.4 and 7 within two weeks, as last opportunity. Notice thereafter be issued. SLP(Crl) No. 4607/2017 Respondent No.1 has already filed counter affidavit. The Ld. Counsel for the petitioner to take fresh steps for service of respondent Nos.2 and 3 within two weeks, as last opportunity. Notice thereafter be issued. SLP(Crl) No. 4606/2017 Four weeks' time, as last opportunity, is granted to respondent No.1 for filing counter affidavit. The Ld. Counsel for the petitioner to take fresh steps for service of respondent Nos.2 to 6 within two weeks, as last opportunity. Notice thereafter be issued. List again on 11.10.2018. KAPIL MEHTA Registrar rd 21.8.2018

ITEM NO.90 REGISTRAR COURT. 1 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 BEFORE THE REGISTRAR MR. KAPIL MEHTA IA 6532/2017, in Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s). 3567-3568/2017 SHAMIM KHAN Petitioner(s) VERSUS DEBASHISH CHAKRABARTY & ORS. Respondent(s) WITH SLP(Crl) No. 4608/2017 (II-A) SLP(Crl) No. 4607/2017 (II-A) SLP(Crl) No. 4606/2017 (II-A) Date : 04-07-2018 These matters were called on for hearing today. For Petitioner(s) Mr. V. Madhukar, Adv. Ms. Monisha Handa, Adv. Mr. Mohit D. Ram, AOR Mr. Pukhrambam Ramesh Kumar, AOR For Respondent(s) Mr. Ashish Wad, Adv. Mrs. Jayashree Wad, Adv. Mr. Sidharth Mahajan, Adv. Ms. Paromita Majumdar, Adv. Ms. Sukriti Jaggi, Adv. M/S. J S Wad And Co, AOR Mr. Arun Nagar, Adv. Mr. P. N. Puri, AOR Mr. Uday B. Dube, AOR Ms. Shubhada Phaltankar, Adv. Mr. Nishant Ramakantrao Katneshwarkar, AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R SLP(Crl.) No.3567-3568/2017 Four weeks' time is granted to respondent Nos.1, 3 and 4 for filing counter affidavit. Service is complete on respondent No.5 but none has entered appearance.

Item No.90 -2- The Ld. Counsel for the petitioner to take fresh steps for service of respondent No.2 within two weeks. Notice thereafter be issued. SLP(Crl) No. 4608/2017 Respondent Nos.1 to 3 and 6 have already filed counter affidavit. Four weeks' time is granted to respondent No.5 for filing counter affidavit. The Ld. Counsel for the petitioner to take fresh steps for service of respondent Nos.4 and 7 within two weeks. Notice thereafter be issued. SLP(Crl) No. 4607/2017 Respondent No.1 has already filed counter affidavit. The Ld. Counsel for the petitioner to take fresh steps for service of respondent Nos.2 and 3 within two weeks. Notice thereafter be issued. SLP(Crl) No. 4606/2017 Four weeks' time is granted to respondent No.1 for filing counter affidavit. The Ld. Counsel for the petitioner to take fresh steps alongwith fresh and complete addresses of respondent Nos.2 to 6 within two weeks. Notice thereafter be issued. List again on 21.8.2018. KAPIL MEHTA Registrar 4.7.2018 rd

REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 457 OF 2018 (Arising out of SLP (Crl.) No.5838 of 2014) MANJU SURANA ….Appellant Versus SUNIL ARORA & ORS. ..…Respondents WITH CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 458 OF 2018 (Arising out of SLP (Crl.) No.1092 of 2015) J U D G M E N T SANJAY KISHAN KAUL, J . CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 457 OF 2018 (Arising out of SLP (Crl.) No.5838 of 2014) 1. Leave granted. 2. The question of law sought to be raised in the appeals is as to whether prior sanction for prosecution qua allegation of corruption in respect of a public servants is required before setting in motion even the investigative process under Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Cr.P.C.’). Page 1 of 30

3. In Criminal Appeal No………….of 2018 (arising out of SLP (Crl.) No.5838 of 2014), the appellant submitted a complaint before the Special Judge (Prevention of Corruption Act, Jaipur Metropolitan City, Jaipur) under Sections 7 & 13 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘PC Act’) and Sections 420, 467, 468 & 471 read with Section 120B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘IPC’). The appellant sought investigation of offences and registration of an FIR against the accused persons. The first respondent arrayed as an accused before the Special Judge as “Principal Secretary to the Government P.H.E.D. Chief Minister” is the first respondent before us, the other persons arrayed as accused before the Special Judge, being the Superintending Engineer, Chief Engineer, ex Chief Minister (as she then was), ex Minister of P.H.E.D., Finance Secretary, Deputy Accountant General and P.S.L. Company through its Managing Director are also before us, as the Respondents. It is alleged in the complaint that in the drinking water project Nos.1 to 8, a conspiracy was hatched for fulfilling the personal vested interest by way of a tender procedure, which caused loss to the Government fund. The last and the 8 th accused was stated to be given Page 2 of 30

the advantage for personal interest. It is not necessary for the purpose of the present controversy to get into the detailed facts but suffice to say that as per the allegations of the appellant, there was a shortage of budget for running the projects and the report of respondent No.1, then the Principal Secretary, dated 20.4.2008 was liable to be perused. In order to make payments for the outstanding and running projects, the Chief Secretary, accused No.1, is stated to have written a proposal to the Finance Department but the Finance Secretary expressed his inability for making available such huge amounts. The fund was stated to have been digressed. 4. It is extremely relevant to note that from the facts, which have now come to light, respondent No.1 herein was neither holding the post of the Principal Secretary of the P.H.E.D nor the Chief Secretary at the relevant stage of time and the description of his office is consequently not correct. The first respondent was actually holding the post of Principal Secretary to the Chief Minister. 5. The Special Judge closed the complaint in terms of order dated 4.2.2014 on account of the fact that the accused persons arrayed as Page 3 of 30

respondents are either public servants or have remained as public servants and no prior sanction has been granted by the competent authority under Section 19 of the PC Act read with Section 197 of the Cr.P.C. To support this conclusion, reliance was placed on the judgment of this Court in Anil Kumar v. M.K. Aiyappa 1 opining that no complaint could be forwarded for investigation under Section 156(3) of the Cr.P.C. nor could any proceedings be initiated under Sections 202 & 202 of the Cr.P.C. in the absence of such sanction. It was, thus, observed that further proceedings in the case would be conducted on the filing of sanction. 6. The appellant preferred a revision petition against this order, which has been dismissed by the detailed impugned order dated 30.4.2014. The order really refers to various judicial pronouncements and then concludes that in view of the judgment in Anil Kumar v. M.K. Aiyappa 2 and P. Nallammal v. State 3 both for the reasons of absence of any sanction, as also the revision petition being directed against an interlocutory order, the petition was not maintainable. 1

(2013) 10 SCC 705 2

supra 3

(1999) 6 SCC 559 Page 4 of 30

Thereafter the present Special Leave Petition has been filed. 7. We have heard learned counsel for the parties. 8. Mr. Prashant Bhushan, learned counsel appearing for the appellant sought to question the view taken in Anil Kumar 4 and in L. Narayana Swamy v. State of Karnataka 5 following the earlier judgment. The sub-stratum of the argument is that the requirement of prior sanction for prosecution against the public servant would arise only when cognizance is taken, while no such sanction was required at the stage of setting into motion an investigation under Section 156(3) of the Cr.P.C.. It was, thus, contended that the observations in these two judgments are per incuriam or in conflict with the long line of earlier judgments on the question as to when the cognizance can be stated to have be taken. Mr. Bhushan drew our attention to Section 19(1) of the PC Act, which reads as under: “ 19. Previous sanction necessary for prosecution - (1) No court shall take cognizance of an offence punishable under section 7, 10, 11, 13 and15 alleged to have been committed by a public servant, except with the previous sanction,- 4

supra 5

(2016) 9 SCC 598 Page 5 of 30

(a) in the case of a person who is employed in connection with the affairs of the Union and is not removable from his office save by or with the sanction of the Central Government, of that Government; (b) in the case of a person who is employed in connection with the affairs of a State and is not removable from his office save by or with the sanction of the State Government, of that Government; (c) in the case of any other person, of the authority competent to remove him from his office.” 9. He sought to emphasise that the bar is to the court taking “cognizance of an offence except with the previous sanction”. 10. We may next refer to Chapter XIV of the Cr.P.C., which is under the heading “Conditions Requisite for Initiation of Proceedings”. Section 190 states as to when cognizance would be taken and is reproduced for convenience as under: “ 190. Cognizance of offences by Magistrates.- (1) Subject to the provisions of this Chapter, any Magistrate of the first class, and any Magistrate of the second class specially empowered in this behalf under sub-section (2 ), may take cognizance of any offence- (a) upon receiving a complaint of facts which constitute such offence; (b) upon a police report of such facts; Page 6 of 30

(c) upon information received from any person other than a police officer, or upon his own knowledge, that such offence has been committed. (2) The Chief Judicial Magistrate may empower any Magistrate of the second class to take cognizance under sub-section (1 ) of such offences as are within his competence to inquire into or try.” 11. Section 197 of the Cr.P.C. under the same chapter prescribes a pre-condition of obtaining sanction before the court takes cognizance against a public servant. The relevant portion reads as under: “ 197. Prosecution of Judges and public servants.- (1) When any person who is or was a Judge or Magistrate or a public servant not removable from his office save by or with the sanction of the Government is accused of any offence alleged to have been committed by him while acting or purporting to act in the discharge of his official duty, no Court shall take cognizance of such offence except with the previous sanction- (a) in the case of a person who is employed or, as the case may be, was at the time of commission of the alleged offence employed, in connection with the affairs of the Union, of the Central Government; (b) in the case of a person who is employed or, as the case may be, was at the lime of commission of the alleged offence employed, in connection with the affairs of a State, of the State Government: Provided that where the alleged offence was committed by a person referred to in clause (b) during the period while a Proclamation issued under clause (1) of Article 356 of the Constitution was in force in a State, clause (b) will apply as if for the expression "State Government" occurring therein, the Page 7 of 30

expression "Central Government" were substituted.” 12. Once cognizance is taken the procedure is triggered off under Chapter XV with the heading “Complaints to Magistrates”. It would be suffice to reproduce Section 200 as under: “ 200. Examination of complainant.- A Magistrate taking cognizance of an offence on complaint shall examine upon oath the complainant and the witnesses present, if any, and the substance of such examination shall be reduced to writing and shall be signed by the complainant and the witnesses, and also by the Magistrate: Provided that, when the complaint is made in writing, the Magistrate need not examine the complainant and the witnesses— (a) if a public servant acting or purporting to act in the discharge of his official duties or a Court has made the complaint; or (b) if the Magistrate makes over the case for inquiry or trial to another Magistrate under section 192: Provided further that if the Magistrate makes over the case to another Magistrate under section 192 after examining the complainant and the witnesses, the latter Magistrate need not re-examine them.” 13. The Magistrate, if he thinks fit, may postpone the issue of process against the accused to inquire the case himself or direct an investigation post taking cognizance, as per Section 202, which is reproduced herein under: Page 8 of 30

“ 202. Postponement of issue of process.- (1) Any Magistrate, on receipt of a complaint of an offence of which he is authorised to take cognizance or which has been made over to him under section 192 , may, if he thinks fit [and shall in a case where the accused is residing at a place beyond the area in which he exercises his jurisdiction], postpone the issue of process against the accused, and either inquire into the case himself or direct an investigation to be made by a police officer or by such other person as he thinks fit, for the purpose of deciding whether or not there is sufficient ground for proceeding: Provided that no such direction for investigation shall be made- (a) where it appears to the Magistrate that the offence complained of is triable exclusively by the Court of Sessions; or (b) where the complaint has not been made by a Court, unless the complainant and the witnesses present (if any) have been examined on oath under section 200 . (2) In an inquiry under sub-section (1), the Magistrate may, if he thinks fit, take evidence of witness on oath: Provided that if it appears to the Magistrate that the offence complained of is triable exclusively by the Court of Session, he shall call upon the complainant to produce all hi s witnesses and examine them on oath. (3) If an investigation under sub-section (1) is made by a person not being a police officer, he shall have for that investigation all the powers conferred by this Code on an officer in charge of a police station except the power to arrest without warrant.” 14. Keeping in mind the aforesaid provisions, we now turn to Chapter XII with the heading “Information to the Police and their Page 9 of 30

powers to investigate”. Section 156 forms a part of this Chapter and reads as under: “ 156. Police officer's power to investigate cognizable cases.- (1) Any officer in charge of a police station may, without the order of a Magistrate, investigate any cognizable case which a Court having jurisdiction over the local area within the limits of such station would have power to inquire into or try under the provisions of Chapter XIII. (2) No proceeding of a police officer in any such case shall at any stage be called in question on the ground that the case was one which such officer was not empowered under this section to investigate. (3) Any Magistrate empowered under section 190 may order such an investigation as above-mentioned.” 15. The relevant provision is Section 156(3) of the Cr.P.C. where a Magistrate is empowered to make an order of investigation in terms of sub-sections (1) & (2). 16. It is, thus, the submission of Mr. Prashant Bhushan that there is a distinction between the investigation carried out at pre-cognizance stage, which would not face the requirement of a prior sanction qua a public servant, as against a post-cognizance proceeding which needs prior sanction. We may also notice that in terms of sub-section (4) of Section 5 of the PC Act, for the proceedings before a Special Judge Page 10 of 30

under the PC Act, the Special Judge shall be deemed to be a Magistrate. 17. In the aforesaid context, he referred to a catena of judgments. We have analyzed those and some other cases dealing with the issue. Judgments on the nature of proceedings being an inquiry under Section 156(3) of the Cr.P.C.: 18. In R.R. Chari v. State of U.P. 6 , a three Judges Bench of this Court, in the inception years of this Court, referred to Gopal Marwari v. Emperor 7 qua the observations that the word ‘cognizance’ indicates the point when a Magistrate or a Judge first takes judicial notice of an offence. This was different from initiation of proceedings. The word ‘cognizance’ was somewhat of an indefinite import and perhaps not used exactly in the same sense. Thereafter it proceeded to notice the observations of Das Gupta, J. in Superintendent and Remembrancer of Legal Affairs, West Bengal v. Abani Kumar Banerjee 8 where observations were made to the effect that what is taking cognizance has 6

1951 SCR 312 7

AIR 1943 Pat 245 8

AIR 1950 Cal 437 Page 11 of 30

not been defined in the Cr.P.C., but it could be said that any Magistrate who has taken cognizance of any offence under Section 190(1)(a) of the Cr.P.C. must not only have applied his mind to the contents of the petition but must have done so for the purpose of proceeding in a particular way as indicated in the subsequent provisions of this Chapter – proceedings under Section 200 and thereafter under Section 202.However, when the Magistrate applies his mind, not for the purpose of proceeding under the subsequent sections of this Chapter, but for some other kind, e.g. ordering investigation under Section 156(3) or issuing a search warrant for the purposes of the investigation, he could not be said to have taken cognizance of offence. The Supreme Court gives its imprimatur to these observations. 19. Gopal Das Sindhi v. State of Assam 9 (three Judges Bench), the decision in R.R. Chari 10 was followed. 20. Jamuna Singh v. Bhadai Shah 11 (three Judges Bench),the decision in R.R. Chari 12 was followed. 9

AIR 1961 SC 986 10

supra 11

(1964) 5 SCR 37 12

supra Page 12 of 30

21. In Nirmaljit Singh Hoon v. State of W.B. 13 (three Judges Bench), it was sought to be canvassed that the investigation by the police being one ordered by the Chief Presidency Magistrate under Section 156(3) of the Cr.P.C., that investigation was part of the proceedings of the Court. This plea was rejected inter alia on the ground that the police authorities have, under Sections 154 & 156 of the Cr.P.C., a statutory right to investigate into a cognizable offence without requiring any sanction from a judicial authority. Secondly, for taking cognizance under Section190(1)(a) of the Cr.P.C., a Magistrate must not only have applied his mind but must have done so for purposes of proceeding under Section 200 and the provisions following that Section. The application of mind only for ordering investigation under Section 156(3) or issuing a warrant for purposes of investigation could not be said to have taken cognizance of the offence. 22. Devarapally Lakshminarayana Reddy v. V. Narayana Reddy 14 (three Judges Bench) – Mr. Prashant Bhushan referred to the aforesaid judgment for analysis of Section 156(3) of the Cr.P.C. In para 13, it 13

(1973) 3 SCC 753 14

(1976) 3 SCC 252 Page 13 of 30

has been observed that when a Magistrate receives a complaint he is not bound to take cognizance if the facts alleged in the complaint, disclose the commission of an offence. Only if he forms an opinion that the allegations therein disclose a cognizable offence and the forwarding of the complaint to the police for investigation under Section 156(3) will be conducive to justice and save the valuable time of the Magistrate from being wasted in enquiring into a matter which was primarily the duty of the police to investigate, he will be justified in adopting that course as an alternative to taking cognizance of the offence, himself. Thereafter in paras 14 & 17, it has been observed as under: “14. This raises the incidental question: What is meant by “taking cognizance of an offence” by a Magistrate within the contemplation of Section 190? This expression has not been defined in the Code. But from the scheme of the Code, the content and marginal heading of Section 190 and the caption of Chapter XIV under which Sections 190 to 199 occur, it is clear that a case can be said to be instituted in a court only when the court takes cognizance of the offence alleged therein. The ways in which such cognizance can be taken are set out in clauses (a), (b) and (c) of Section 190(1). Whether the Magistrate has or has not taken cognizance of the offence will depend on the circumstances of the particular case including the mode in which the case is sought to be instituted, and the nature of the preliminary action, if any, taken by the Magistrate. Broadly speaking, when on receiving a complaint, the Magistrate applies his mind for the purposes of proceeding under Section 200 and Page 14 of 30

the succeeding sections in Chapter XV to the Code of 1973, he is said to have taken cognizance of the offence within the meaning to Section 190(1) (a). If, instead of proceeding under Chapter XV, he has, in the judicial exercise of his discretion, taken action of some other kind, such as issuing a search warrant for the purpose of investigation, or ordering investigation by the police under Section 156(3), he cannot be said to have taken cognizance of any offence.” …. …. …. …. …. “17. Section 156(3) occurs in Chapter XII, under the caption : “Information to the Police and their powers to investigate”; while Section 202 is in Chapter XV which bears the heading: “Of complaints to Magistrates”. The power to order police investigation under Section 156(3) is different from the power to direct investigation conferred by Section 202(1). The two operate in distinct spheres at different stages. The first is exercisable at the pre-cognizance stage, the second at the post- cognizance stage when the Magistrate is in seisin of the case. That is to say in the case of a complaint regarding the commission of a cognizable offence, the power under Section 156(3) can be invoked by the Magistrate before he takes cognizance of the offence under Section 190(1)(a). But if he once takes such cognizance and embarks upon the procedure embodied in Chapter XV, he is not competent to switch back to the pre-cognizance stage and avail of Section 156(3). It may be noted further that an order made under sub-section (3) of Section 156, is in the nature of a peremptory reminder or intimation to the police to exercise their plenary powers of investigation under Section 156(1). Such an investigation embraces the entire continuous process which begins with the collection of evidence under Section 156 and ends with a report or charge-sheet under Section 173. On the other hand, Section 202 comes in at a stage when some evidence has been collected by the Magistrate in proceedings under Chapter XV, but the same is deemed insufficient to take a decision as to the next step in the prescribed procedure. In such a situation, the Magistrate is empowered under Section 202 to direct, within the limits Page 15 of 30

circumscribed by that section an investigation “for the purpose of deciding whether or not there is sufficient ground for proceeding”. Thus the object of an investigation under Section 202 is not to initiate a fresh case on police report but to assist the Magistrate in completing proceedings already instituted upon a complaint before him.” 23. In Tula Ram v. Kishore Singh 15 (two Judges Bench) – cited before us, it was observed that Sections 190 and 156(3) of the Cr.P.C. are mutually exclusive and work in totally different spheres. Thus, even if a Magistrate receives a complaint under Section 190, he can act under Section 156(3) provided that he does not take cognizance. Chapter 14 deals with post cognizance stage while Chapter 12, so far as the Magistrate is concerned, deals with pre-cognizance stage, that is to say that even when a Magistrate starts acting under Section 190 and the provisions following, he cannot resort to Section 156(3). Thus, Section 202 would apply only in cases where the Magistrate has taken cognizance and chooses to inquire into the complaint either himself or through any other agency. Before proceeding to do so, there may be a situation where the Magistrate, before taking cognizance himself, chooses to order a pure and simple investigation under Section 156(3) of the Cr.P.C. 15

(1977) 4 SCC 459 Page 16 of 30

24. Srinivas Gundluri v. SEPCO Electric Power Construction Corpn. 16 (two Judges Bench) – The Magistrate in the case had merely allowed the application filed by the complainant under Section 156(3) of the Cr.P.C. and sent the same along with its annexure for investigation by the police officer and that was held not to have amounted to having taken cognizance. 25. Subramanian Swamy v. CBI 17 (five Judges Bench) – It was observed that Section 156 of the Cr.P.C. enables an officer in charge of a police station to investigate a cognizable offence. Insofar as non- cognizable offences are concerned, it was found that the police officer by virtue of Section 155 Cr.P.C. can investigate it after obtaining appropriate orders from the Magistrate having power to try such case or commit the case for trial regardless of the status of the officer concerned. In view thereof, the scheme of Sections 155 and 156 of the Cr.P.C. was held to indicate that the local police may investigate a senior government officer without previous approval of the Central Government. 16

(2010) 8 SCC 206 17

(2014) 8 SCC 682 Page 17 of 30

The Constitution Bench while dealing with the inquiry and investigation under the P.C. Act held that there was no basis to classify the two sets of public servants differently on the ground that one set of officers is decision-making officers and not the other set of officers. 26. Despite the aforesaid catena of judgments, a different path has been traversed in two judgments of this Court where the offences alleged are under the P.C. Act read with the I.P.C. 27. In Anil Kumar v. M.K. Aiyappa 18 (two Judges Bench), the Court proceeded to examine whether the Magistrate, while exercising his powers under Section 156(3) of the Cr.P.C., could act in a mechanical or casual manner and go on with the complaint after getting the report. In that context, a reference was made to an earlier judgment in Maksud Saiyed v. State of Gujarat 19 case, where it was observed that there was a requirement of the application of mind by the Magistrate before exercising jurisdiction under Section 156(3) of the Cr.P.C. Thereafter the Bench proceeded to draw a conclusion that a Special Judge/Magistrate cannot refer the matter under Section 156(3) 18

supra 19

(2008) 5 SCC 668 Page 18 of 30

of the Cr.P.C. against a public servant without a valid sanction order. 28. The Bench further proceeded to examine whether the order directing investigation under Section 156(3) of the Cr.P.C. would amount to taking cognizance of the offence since a contention was raised that the expression “cognizance” appearing in Section 19(1) of the P.C. Act would have to be construed as post-cognizance stage and not pre-cognizance stage and therefore, the requirement of sanction does not arise prior to taking cognizance of the offences of the P.C. Act. Insofar as the expression ‘cognizance’, which appears in Section 197 of the Cr.P.C. was concerned, a reference was made to the judgment in State of U.P. v. Paras Nath Singh 20 . In that case it was observed that the jurisdiction of a Magistrate to take cognizance of any offence is provided by Section 190 of the Cr.P.C. and so far as the public servant was concerned this was clearly barred by Section 197 of the Cr.P.C. unless the sanction was obtained from the appropriate authority. After referring to certain other judgments on the issue of purport and meaning of the word ‘cognizance’, it was concluded that ‘cognizance’ has a wider connotation and is not merely confined to the 20

(2009) 6 SCC 372 Page 19 of 30

stage of taking cognizance of the offence. 29. The Bench proceeded to discuss Section 19(1) of the P.C. Act as also Section 19(3) of the P.C. Act, which reads as under: “ 19. Previous sanction necessary for prosecution.— …. …. …. …. …. (3) Notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974),— (a) no finding, sentence or order passed by a special Judge shall be reversed or altered by a court in appeal, confirmation or revision on the ground of the absence of, or any error, omission or irregularity in, the sanction required under sub-section (1), unless in the opinion of that court, a failure of justice has in fact been occasioned thereby; (b) no court shall stay the proceedings under this Act on the ground of any error, omission or irregularity in the sanction granted by the authority, unless it is satisfied that such error, omission or irregularity has resulted in a failure of justice; (c) no court shall stay the proceedings under this Act on any other ground and no court shall exercise the powers of revision in relation to any interlocutory order passed in any inquiry, trial, appeal or other proceedings.” 30. It was sought to be contended that the requirement of sanction was only procedural in nature and hence directory or else Section 19(3) of the P.C. Act would be rendered otiose. This contention was not found acceptable as sub-section (3) of Section 19 of the P.C. Act had an Page 20 of 30

object to achieve, which applied only in circumstances where a Special Judge had already rendered a finding, sentence or order. This would not mean that the requirement to obtain sanction was not a mandatory requirement. In the absence of prior sanction, it was observed, that the Magistrate cannot order investigation against a public servant even while invoking power under Section 156(3) of the Cr.P.C. 31. L. Narayana Swamy v. State of Karnataka 21 (two Judges Bench) – The judgment in Anil Kumar v. M.K. Aiyappa 22 was followed. After discussing various other pronouncements, it was concluded that even while directing an inquiry under Section 156(3) of the Cr.P.C., the Magistrate applies his judicial mind to the complaint and therefore, it would amount to taking cognizance of the matter. 32. Mr. Tushar Mehta, learned Additional Solicitor General sought to canvas the view taken in the last two judgments referred to aforesaid to submit that application of mind was necessary to exercise power under Section 156(3) of the Cr.P.C. and that credibility of information was to be weighed before ordering investigation ( Ramdev Food 21

(2016) 9 SCC 598 22

supra Page 21 of 30

Products (P) Ltd. v. State of Gujarat 23 ). It was, thus, submitted that allegation against a public servant under the P.C. Act offences are technical in nature and would require a higher evaluation standard and thus the Magistrates ought to apply their mind before ordering investigation against public servant. The consequences of starting investigation under Section 156(3) of the Cr.P.C., it was submitted, would result in the police registering an FIR ( Suresh Chand Jain v. State of Madhya Pradesh 24 and Mohd. Yousuf v. Afaq Jahan 25 ). Thus, a situation may arise where a Magistrate may exercise his power under Section 156(3) of the Cr.P.C. in a routine manner resulting in an FIR being registered against a public servant, who may have no role in the allegation made. 33. We have examined the rival contentions and do find a divergence of opinion, which ought to be settled by a larger Bench. There is no doubt that even at the stage of 156(3), while directing an investigation, there has to be an application of mind by the Magistrate. Thus, it may not be an acceptable proposition to contend that there 23

(2015) 6 SCC 439 24

(2001) 2 SCC 628 25

(2006) 1 SCC 627 Page 22 of 30

would be some consequences to follow were the Magistrate to act in a mechanical and mindless manner. That cannot be the test. 34. The catena of judgments on the issue as to the scope and power of direction by a Magistrate under Chapters 12 & 14 is well established. Thus, the question would be whether in cases of the P.C. Act, a different import has to be read qua the power to be exercised under Section 156(3) of the Cr.P.C., i.e., can it be said that on account of Section 19(1) of the P.C. Act, the scope of inquiry under Section 156(3) of the Cr.P.C. can be said to be one of taking ‘cognizance’ thereby requiring the prior sanction in case of a public servant? It is trite to say that prior sanction to prosecute a public servant for offences under the P.C. Act is a provision contained under Chapter 14 of the Cr.P.C. . Thus, whether such a purport can be imported into Chapter 12 of the Cr.P.C. while directing an investigation under Section 156(3) of the Cr.P.C., merely because a public servant would be involved, would beg an answer. 35. The apprehension expressed by the learned ASG possibly arises from the observations in Suresh Chand Jain v. State of Madhya Page 23 of 30

Pradesh 26 followed in Mohd. Yousuf v. Afaq Jahan 27 . Thus, the observations are to the effect that even at a pre-cognizance stage under Section 156(3) of the Cr.P.C., it is open to the Magistrate to direct the police to register an FIR and that even if the Magistrate does not say in so many words while directing investigation under Section 156(3) of the Code that an FIR should be registered, it is the duty of the officer in charge of the police station to register the FIR regarding the cognizable offence disclosed by the complainant because that police officer could take further steps contemplated in Chapter XII of the Code only thereafter. 36. The complete controversy referred to aforesaid and the conundrum arising in respect of the interplay of the P.C. Act offences read with the Cr.P.C. is, thus, required to be settled by a larger Bench. 37. The papers may be placed before Hon’ble the Chief Justice of India for being placed before a Bench of appropriate strength. Crl. M.P. 161/2015 in SLP (Crl.) No.5838/2014 26

supra 27

supra Page 24 of 30

38. We have passed a detailed order making a reference to a larger Bench insofar as the main matter is concerned. It may be noticed that in the present Special Leave Petition, notice was issued to the Respondents, except Respondent No. 4. Since the proceedings before the Magistrate at the threshold were directed to be kept in abeyance without notice to the Respondent, and thereafter the revision petition was dismissed in limine by the High Court, the occasion for Respondent No.1 to have knowledge of the proceedings did not arise. Respondent No.1 seeks deletion from the array of parties in these proceedings as he has been wrongly arrayed as a party. 39. The aforesaid plea is predicated on the averments in the complaint itself, which seeks to make a grievance over the actions of the Principal Secretary, Public Health and Engineering Department (PHED) in which capacity respondent No.1 is stated to have been arrayed. It is averred in the application that respondent No.1 was serving as a Secretary and Principal Secretary to the Chief Minister and not as Principal Secretary, PHED. In fact, the officer working as the Principal Secretary, PHED has not been arrayed as a respondent. There is no allegation made against the Secretary/Principal Secretary to Page 25 of 30

the Chief Minister. The allegation is of collusion of the respondents. 40. In terms of the averments in the application, respondent No.1 sought to point out that there are only two references to him as accused No.1 - Para 4(iv) and Para 8. These are in the context of inviting tenders, shortage of budget for running the current projects and the report of stated accused No.1 as the Principal Secretary. The second reference is to the stated accused No.1 as the Chief Secretary, who wrote a proposal to the Finance Department whereupon the Finance Secretary expressed his inability for making available such a huge amount. Once again, respondent No.1 was not holding the post of the Chief Secretary nor is the Chief Secretary then arrayed as a party. 41. Our attention was also drawn to the notings file, which are of the Chief Engineer (SP) and approved by the Secretary, PHED and the Hon’ble Minister, PHED. It is, thus, alleged that respondent No.1 was neither involved with the decision making process nor he held any of the two posts. 42. The application is sought to be opposed and a counter affidavit Page 26 of 30

was filed by the appellant. It is stated that respondent No.1 is trying to take undue advantage of the inadvertent mistake of the appellant in mentioning his correct designation while filing the criminal complaint. It is alleged that respondent No.1 was very much involved with the decision making process. In any case the merit of the complaint of the appellant is yet to be examined. 43. On 20.2.2018, we had issued directions for the appellant to place on record the material placed before the Magistrate in support of the complaint indicating the alleged involvement of respondent No.1. In response thereto, a supplementary affidavit was filed by the appellant. On this behalf a file noting of 9.5.2008 is referred to. The discussion was with regard to the funding of the same project and the presence of respondent No.1 is noted though undisputedly the minutes are not signed by him while they are signed by other officers. It has been averred that since the Principal Secretary to the Chief Minister had no role to play in the discussion, why was he/respondent No.1 present? 44. We may also note the submission of learned counsel for respondent No.1 that in case a situation arises where the Magistrate has Page 27 of 30

to proceed on the complaint under Section 156(3) of the Cr.P.C. and during investigation some material is found, the counsel cannot really object to the inclusion of the name of respondent No.1 at that stage. However, inclusion at this stage is stated to be without any material facts and is an embarrassment, considering the constitutional position held by respondent No.1. 45. We have given a thought to the respective pleas of the parties. 46. No doubt the process under Section 156(3) of the Cr.P.C. is only one of investigation. The larger question, of whether any such direction can be issued without prior sanction has been referred to a larger bench. Were the appellant to succeed and were the matter to go back to the Magistrate and the Magistrate after application of mind forms an opinion to direct investigation by the police, it would be always open to the Magistrate to include the name of respondent No.1 if such material is found against him. 47. Merely because the appellant has roped in respondent No.1 in the complaint is not sufficient ground to allow his name to be included Page 28 of 30

as such. The complaint is categorical – the role of Secretary, PHED and the Principal Secretary has been questioned. That is the mindset with which the complainant knocked the doors of the criminal courts. There was no allegation in respect of any role played by the Secretary/Principal Secretary to the Chief Minister. It cannot be said to be a mere mis-description of name, which can be corrected. It cannot be the stand of the appellant that willy-nilly somehow, respondent No.1 must remain arrayed as an accused in those proceedings, even though the proceedings before the Magistrate are at the stage of only whether there should be a direction for investigation or not. It is not that every officer in the Government has to be arrayed in respect of any role performed or not. The mere presence in one meeting of respondent No.1 and that too when he was not a signatory and really had no role to play in that capacity, as apparent from the minutes, cannot be now used to justify his name being included as an accused. This is clearly an afterthought. It is not for the appellant to question as to which officer should or should not be present. 48. We are, thus, of the view that respondent No.1 needs to be struck off from the array of parties both in the present proceedings and Page 29 of 30

consequently in the complaint. We, however, make it clear that if a situation arises where investigation is directed under Section 156(3) of the Cr.P.C. and some material comes to light to array respondent No.1 as an accused, our order would not come in the way. 49. The application is accordingly allowed, leaving the parties to bear their own costs. CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 458 OF 2018 (Arising out of SLP (Crl.) No.1092 of 2015 50. Leave granted. 51. The matter is referred to a larger Bench along with SLP (CRL.) No.5838/2014 in terms of the judgment passed today. ..….….…………………….J. (J. Chelameswar) ...……………………………J. (Sanjay Kishan Kaul) New Delhi. March 27, 2018. Page 30 of 30

1 ITEM NO.1501 COURT NO.2 SECTION II (For Judgment) S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Criminal Appeal No. 457 of 2018 (Arising out of Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s). 5838/2014) MANJU SURANA Appellant(s) VERSUS SUNIL ARORA & ORS. Respondent(s) WITH Criminal Appeal No. 458 of 2018 (Arising out of Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal(Crl.) No(s). 1092/2015 (II) Date : 27-03-2018 These matters were called on for pronouncement of judgment today. For Petitioner(s) Mr. Prashant Bhushan, AOR For Respondent(s) Mr. Ajay Kapur, AAG Mr. Anirudh Singh, Adv. Mr. Milind Kumar, AOR Mr. Rishi Matoliya, AOR Mr. Satya Mitra Garg, AOR Mr. Nachiketa Joshi, AOR Mr. Rajeev Sharma, AOR Mr. Merusagar Samantaray, AOR Mr. Gautam Jha, AOR Mr. Nishant Ramakantrao Katneshwarkar, AOR Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul pronounced the judgment of the Bench comprising of Hon’ble Mr. Justice J. Chelameswar and His Lordship. In terms of the signed order, the Court passed the following Order in Criminal Appeal No. 457 of 2018 arising out of SLP(Crl.) No. 5838 of 2014 and Criminal Appeal No. 458 of 2018 arising out of SLP(Crl.) No. 1092 of 2015 as follows:-

2 Crl. Appeal No. 457 of 2018 @ SLP(Crl.) No. 5838 of 2014 “Leave granted. …. The complete controversy referred to aforesaid and the conundrum arising in respect of the interplay of the P.C. Act offences read with the Cr.P.C. is, thus, required to be settled by a larger Bench. The papers may be placed before Hon’ble the Chief Justice of India for being placed before a Bench of appropriate strength.” Crl.M.P. No. 161/2015 in SLP(Crl.) No. 5838/2014 is allowed, leaving the parties to bear their own costs. Crl. Appeal No. 458 of 2018 @ SLP(Crl.) No. 1092 of 2015 Leave granted. The matter is referred to a larger Bench along with SLP(Crl.) No. 5838/2014 in terms of the judgment passed today. (DEEPAK MANSUKHANI) (RAJINDER KAUR) AR CUM PS COURT MASTER (Signed reportable judgment is placed on the file)

1 ITEM NO.8 COURT NO.2 SECTION II 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). 5838/2014 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 30-04-2014 in SBCRP No. 341/2014 passed by the High Court Of Judicature For Rajasthan At Jaipur) MANJU SURANA Petitioner(s) VERSUS SUNIL ARORA & ORS. Respondent(s) (LIST THE APPLICATION (CRL.M.P. NO. 161/2015) FOR DELETION OF THE NAME OF RESPONDENT NO. 1 IN SLP(CRL) NO. 5838/2014 FOR FINAL HEARING.(R/P DT. 3.1.2017) and IA No.30599/2018-I/A FOR AMENDMENT OF APP. FOR DELETION OF NAME OF RES. NO. 1 FROM ARRAY OF PARTIES) WITH SLP(Crl) No. 1092/2015 (II) Date : 07-03-2018 These petitions were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J. CHELAMESWAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KISHAN KAUL For Petitioner(s) Mr. Prashant Bhushan, AOR Mr. Rohit Kumar Singh,Adv. Mr. Shakti Vardhan,Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. H.D. Thanvi,Adv. Mr. Rishi Matoliya, AOR Mr. Tushar Mehta,ASG Mr. Shiv Mangal Sharma,AAG Mr. S.S. Shamshery,AAG Mr. Ajay Kapur,AAG Mr. Anirudh Singh,Adv. Mr. Milind Kumar, AOR Mr. vikas Singh,Sr.Adv. Mr. Satya Mitra Garg, AOR Mr. Anchit Sharma,Adv. Ms. Dipika Kalia,Adv. Mr. Kprish Seth,Adv. Mr. Nachiketa Joshi, AOR

2 Mr. Rajeev Sharma, AOR Mr. Merusagar Samantaray, AOR Mr. Gautam Jha, AOR Mr. Nishant Ramakantrao Katneshwarkar, AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Heard learned counsel for the parties. Order reserved. A short note may be filed by Mr. Tushar Mehta, learned Additional Solicitor General by Friday, 9 th MARCH, 2018. (OM PARKASH SHARMA) (RAJINDER KAUR) AR CUM PS BRANCH OFFICER

1 ITEM NO.8 COURT NO.2 SECTION II 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). 5838/2014 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 30-04-2014 in SBCRP No. 341/2014 passed by the High Court Of Judicature For Rajasthan At Jaipur) MANJU SURANA Petitioner(s) VERSUS SUNIL ARORA & ORS. Respondent(s) (LIST THE APPLICATION (CRL.M.P. NO. 161/2015) FOR DELETION OF THE NAME OF RESPONDENT NO. 1 IN SLP(CRL) NO. 5838/2014 FOR FINAL HEARING.(R/P DT. 3.1.2017)) WITH SLP(Crl) No. 1092/2015 (II) Date : 20-02-2018 These petitions were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J. CHELAMESWAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KISHAN KAUL For Petitioner(s) Mr. Prashant Bhushan, AOR Mr. Rohit Kumar Singh ,Adv. Mr. Omana Kuttan K.K.,Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Vikas Singh,Sr.Adv. Mr. Satya Mitra Garg, AOR Mrs. Manju Aggarwal,Adv. Ms. Dipika Kalia,Adv. Mr. Kpish Seth,Adv. Mr. Anchit Sharma,Adv. Mr. H.D. Thanvi,Adv. Ms. Preeti Thanvi,Adv. Mr. Rishi Matoliya, AOR Mr. Tushar Mehta,ASG Mr. Ajay Kapoor,Sr.Adv. Mr. Shiv Mangal Sharma,AAG Mr. Saurabh Shyam Shamshery ,AAG Mr. Puneet Parikar,Adv. Ms. Himani Sagar ,Adv.

2 Ms. Mahima Dang,Adv. Mr. Milind Kumar, AOR Mr. Nachiketa Joshi, AOR Mr. Rajeev Sharma, AOR Ms. Radhalakshmi R. ,Adv. Mr. Merusagar Samantaray, AOR Mr. Gautam Jha, AOR Mr. Nishant Ramakantrao Katneshwarkar, AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Crl.M.P.No.161/2015 in SLP(Crl No.5838/2014 Learned counsel for the petitioner to place on record the material placed before the magistrate in support of the complaint indicating the alleged involvement of respondent No.1, by 5 th March, 2018. List both the application and the SLPs on 7 th March, 2018. (OM PARKASH SHARMA) (RAJINDER KAUR) AR CUM PS BRANCH OFFICER

1 ITEM NO.10 COURT NO.2 SECTION II 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). 5838/2014 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 30-04-2014 in SBCRP No. 341/2014 passed by the High Court Of Judicature For Rajasthan At Jaipur) MANJU SURANA Petitioner(s) VERSUS SUNIL ARORA & ORS. Respondent(s) (LIST THE APPLICATION (CRL.M.P. NO. 161/2015) FOR DELETION OF THE NAME OF RESPONDENT NO. 1 IN SLP(CRL) NO. 5838/2014 FOR FINAL HEARING.(R/P DT. 3.1.2017)) WITH SLP(Crl) No. 1092/2015 (II) Date : 16-01-2018 These petitions were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J. CHELAMESWAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KISHAN KAUL For Petitioner(s) Mr. Prashant Bhushan, AOR For Respondent(s) Mr. H.D. Thanvi,Adv. Ms. Preeti Thanvi,Adv. Mr. Rishi Matoliya, AOR Mr. Tushar Mehta,ASG Mr. Ajay Kapur,AAG Mr. Shiv Mangal Sharma,Adv. Mr. Anirdudh Singh,Adv. Mr. Milind Kumar, AOR Mr. Himani Sagar,Adv. Mr. Vikas Singh,Sr.Adv. Mr. Satya Mitra Garg, AOR Mr. Anchit Sharma,Adv. Mrs. Manju Aggarwal,Adv. Ms. Deepika Kalia,Adv. Mr. Kapish Seth,Adv. Mr. Nachiketa Joshi, AOR

1 ITEM NO.43 COURT NO.2 SECTION II 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). 5838/2014 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 30-04-2014 in SBCRP No. 341/2014 passed by the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan at Jaipur) MANJU SURANA Petitioner(s) VERSUS SUNIL ARORA & ORS. Respondent(s) (LIST THE APPLICATION (CRL.M.P. NO. 161/2015) FOR DELETION OF THE NAME OF RESPONDENT NO. 1 IN SLP(CRL) NO. 5838/2014 FOR FINAL HEARING.(R/P DT. 3.1.2017)) WITH SLP(Crl) No. 1092/2015 (II) Date : 11-12-2017 These petitions were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J. CHELAMESWAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KISHAN KAUL For Petitioner(s) Mr. Prashant Bhushan, AOR Mr. Rohit Kumar Singh, Adv. Mr. Shakti Vardhan, Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. H.D. Thanvi, Adv. Ms. Preeti Thanvi, Adv. Kunwar Ratnesh Rath, Adv. Mr. Rishi Matoliya, AOR Mr. Ajay Kapoor, AAG Mr. Milind Kumar, AOR Mr. Vikas Singh, Sr.Adv. Mr. Anchit Sharma, Adv. Mr. Satya Mitra Garg, AOR Ms. Manju Aggarwal, Adv. Mr. Nachiketa Joshi, AOR Mr. Rajeev Sharma, AOR

2 Mr. Merusagar Samantaray, AOR Ms. Chingneivah, Adv. Mr. Gautam Jha, AOR Mr. Nishant Ramakantrao Katneshwarkar, AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R List after winter vacation on a non-miscellaneous day. (USHA RANI BHARDWAJ) (RAJINDER KAUR) AR CUM PS BRANCH OFFICER

ITEM NO.6 COURT NO.6 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.) Nos. 5333-5347/2016 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 05-01-2016 in WP No. 41228/2015, WP No. 26395/2015, WP No. 26396/2015, WP No. 26397/2015, WP No. 41229/2015, WP No. 41230/2015, WP No. 41231/2015, WP No. 41232/2015, WP No. 41234/2015, WP No. 41235/2015, WP No. 41237/2015, WP No. 41238/2015, WP No. 41239/2015, WP No. 41240/2015 and WP No. 41241/2015 passed by the High Court of Karnataka at Bangalore) STATE OF KARNATAKA & ANR. Petitioner(s) VERSUS B.S. YEDDYURAPPA & ANR. Respondent(s) (With IA 11524/2016 - FOR PERMISSION TO FILE ANNEXURES and IA No.119882/2017-PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS) Date : 14-11-2017 This matter was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK BHUSHAN For Petitioner(s) Mr. Joseph Aristotle S., AOR Ms. Priya Aristotle, Adv. Mr. Ashish Yadav, Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Gurmeet Singh Makker, AOR Mr. Mukul Rohtagi, Sr. Adv. Mr. Shubhranshu Padhi, AOR Mr. Kush Chaturvedi, Adv. Mr. Maninder Singh ASG. Mr. A. K. Panda, Sr. Adv. Mr. R. Balasubramanian, Adv. Ms. Vimla Sinha, Adv. Mr. Prabhas Bajaj, Adv. Mrs. Anil Katiyar, AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R At request, the matter stands adjourned by four weeks. (NIDHI AHUJA) (SNEH LATA SHARMA) COURT MASTER COURT MASTER

ITEM NO.3 COURT NO.6 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.) Nos. 5333-5347/2016 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 05-01-2016 in WP No. 41228/2015, WP No. 26395/2015, WP No. 26396/2015, WP No. 26397/2015, WP No. 41229/2015, WP No. 41230/2015, WP No. 41231/2015, WP No. 41232/2015, WP No. 41234/2015, WP No. 41235/2015, WP No. 41237/2015, WP No. 41238/2015, WP No. 41239/2015, WP No. 41240/2015 and WP No. 41241/2015 passed by the High Court of Karnataka at Bangalore) STATE OF KARNATAKA & ANR. Petitioner(s) VERSUS B.S. YEDDYURAPPA & ANR. Respondent(s) (With IA 11524/2016 - FOR PERMISSION TO FILE ANNEXURES) Date : 20-09-2017 This matter was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK BHUSHAN For Petitioner(s) Mr. Vikas Singh, Sr. Adv. Mr. Joseph Aristotle S., AOR Ms. Priya Aristotle, Adv. Ms. Deepeika Kalia, Adv. Mr. Kapish Seth, Adv. Mr. Ashish Yadav, Adv. Ms. Romsha Raj, Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Mukul Rohtagi, Sr. Adv. Mr. Shubhranshu Padhi, AOR Mr. Kush Chaturvedi, Adv. Mr. Gursimran Dillon, Adv. Mr. Maninder Singh, ASG. Mr. A. K. Panda, Sr. Adv. Mr. R. Balasubramanian, Adv. Ms. Vimla Sinha, Adv. Ms. Aarti Sharma, Adv. Ms. Anil Katiyar, AOR Mr. Gurmeet Singh Makker, AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R At request, the matter stands adjourned to 14.11.2017. The parties may file additional documents, as prayed for. (NIDHI AHUJA) (MALA KUMARI SHARMA) COURT MASTER COURT MASTER

1 ITEM NO.60 COURT NO.7 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). 5333-5347/2016 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 05-01-2016 in WP No. 41228/2015 (GM-RES) C/w WP Nos. 26395/2015, 26396/2015. 26397/2015, 41229/2015, 41230/2015, 41232/2015, 41234/2015, 41235/2015,41237/2015,41238/2015,41239/2015,41240/2015, 41241/2015 and 41231/2015, passed by the Hihg Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru) STATE OF KARNATAKA & ANR. Petitioner(s) VERSUS B.S. YEDDYURAPPA & ANR. Respondent(s) (FOR [PERMISSION TO FILE ANNEXURES] ON IA 11524/2016) Date : 31-07-2017 These matters were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK BHUSHAN For Petitioner(s) Mr. Joseph Aristotle S., AOR Ms. Priya Aristotle, Adv. Mr. Ashish Yadav, Adv. Ms. Romsha Raj, Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Ranjit Kumar, SG Mr. Maninder Singh, ASG Mr. Ashok Panda, Sr. Adv. Mr. R. Balasurbramaniam, Adv. Ms. Vimla Sinha, Adv. Mr. Prabhas Bazaz, Adv. Mr. Akshay Amritanshu, Adv. Mr. G.S. Makkar, Adv. Ms. Anil Katiyar, Adv. Mr. K.V. Vishwanathan, Sr. Adv. Mr. Shubhranshu Padhi, AOR Ms. Gursimran Dillon, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following

2 O R D E R List the matters on a non-miscellaneous day for disposal in the third week of September, 2017. (ASHWANI KUMAR) (MALA KUMARI SHARMA) COURT MASTER COURT MASTER

1 ITEM NO.25 & 56 COURT NO.4 SECTION IIA 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.)...... CRLMP NO(S). 8173/2017 (ARISING OUT OF IMPUGNED FINAL JUDGMENT AND ORDER DATED 09/10/2015 IN CRLWP NO. 3121/2015 PASSED BY THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY) KAMLAKAR RATNAKAR SHENOY PETITIONER(S) VERSUS S.S. ZENDE AND ORS RESPONDENT(S) (WITH APPLN. (S) FOR C/DELAY IN FILING SLP AND C/DELAY IN REFILING SLP AND OFFICE REPORT) WITH SLP(CRL.)...CRLMP NO. 8261/2017 (WITH APPLN. (S) FOR C/DELAY IN FILING SLP AND C/DELAY IN REFILING SLP AND OFFICE REPORT) SLP(CRL.) ...CRLMP. NO.8418/2017 [WITH APPLN.(S) FOR C/DELAY IN FILING SLP AND C/DELAY IN REFILING SLP AND OFFICE REPORT] Date : 08/05/2017 These petitions were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RANJAN GOGOI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN SINHA For Petitioner(s) Mr. V. Madhukar, Adv. Ms. Anvita Cowshish, Adv. Mr. Mohit D. Ram, AOR For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the relevant material. Permission to bring on record additional documents is granted.

2 Exemption from filing certified copy of the impugned order is granted. Issue notice on Crl.M.Ps. for condonation of delay as also in the Special Leave Petitions. Tag with Special Leave Petition (Criminal) Nos.3567-3568 of 2017. [VINOD LAKHINA] COURT MASTER [ASHA SONI] COURT MASTER

SEC. IIA IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION NOS. 8261 & 8262 OF 2017 (Applications for condonation of delay in filing and refiling of the SLP) IN PETITION FOR SPECIAL LEAVE TO APPEAL (CRL.) NO. OF 2017 KAMLAKAR RATNAKAR SHENOY ...PETITIONER VERSUS SANJIV V. ANAOKAR AND ORS ...RESPONDENTS OFFICE REPORT The matter has been filed by Mr. Mohit D.Ram, Advocate on behalf of the Petitioner abovementioned against the Judgment and Order dated 27 th October, 2015, in Criminal Writ Petition No. 2207 of 2013, passed by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay. It is submitted that the instant matter is tagged with Crl.M.P.No.8173 of 2017 as both are filed by same petitioner and are arising out of similar issue. The matter abovementioned is, therefore, listed before the Hon'ble Court with this Office Report. DATED this the 6 th day of May, 2017. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR Copy to: Mr. Mohit D.Ram, Advocate ASSISTANT REGISTRAR C2/msn

æ1ITEM NO.25 & 56 COURT NO.4 SECTION IIA S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSPETITION(S) FOR SPECIAL LEAVE TO APPEAL (CRL.)...... CRLMP NO(S).8173/2017(ARISING OUT OF IMPUGNED FINAL JUDGMENT AND ORDER DATED 09/10/2015IN CRLWP NO. 3121/2015 PASSED BY THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY)KAMLAKAR RATNAKAR SHENOY PETITIONER(S) VERSUSS.S. ZENDE AND ORS RESPONDENT(S)(WITH APPLN. (S) FOR C/DELAY IN FILING SLP AND C/DELAY IN REFILINGSLP AND OFFICE REPORT)WITHSLP(CRL.)...CRLMP NO. 8261/2017(WITH APPLN. (S) FOR C/DELAY IN FILING SLP AND C/DELAY IN REFILINGSLP AND OFFICE REPORT)SLP(CRL.) ...CRLMP. NO.8418/2017[WITH APPLN.(S) FOR C/DELAY IN FILING SLP AND C/DELAY IN REFILINGSLP AND OFFICE REPORT]Date : 08/05/2017 These petitions were called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RANJAN GOGOI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN SINHAFor Petitioner(s) Mr. V. Madhukar, Adv.Ms. Anvita Cowshish, Adv. Mr. Mohit D. Ram, AOR For Respondent(s)UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the followingO R D E RHeard the learned counsel for the petitioner andperused the relevant material.Permission to bring on record additional documentsis granted.2Exemption from filing certified copy of the impugnedorder is granted.Issue notice on Crl.M.Ps. for condonation of delayas also in the Special Leave Petitions. Tag with Special Leave Petition (Criminal)Nos.3567-3568 of 2017.[VINOD LAKHINA]COURT MASTER [ASHA SONI]COURT MASTER

ITEM NO.16 COURT NO.4 SECTION IIA S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Petitions for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.)....CRLMP Nos. 6532-6533/2017 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 09/10/2015 in WPCRL No. 4765/2014 and WPCRL No. 4766/2014 passed by the High Court of Bombay) SHAMIM KHAN Petitioner(s) VERSUS DEBASHISH CHAKRABARTY AND ORS ETC ETC Respondent(s) (with appln. (s) for c/delay in filing SLP and office report) Date : 21/04/2017 These petitions were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RANJAN GOGOI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN SINHA For Petitioner(s) Mr. Sanjay Parikh, Adv. Ms. Ninni Susan Thoman, Adv. Mr. Pukhrambam Ramesh Kumar,Adv. Mr. Uday Manaktala, Adv. For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the relevant material. Applications for exemption from filing official translation and from filing certified copy of the judgment are allowed. Issue notice on the application for condonation of delay as well as on the special leave petitions. (Neetu Khajuria) Court Master (Asha Soni) Court Master

äITEM NO.16 COURT NO.4 SECTION IIA S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSPetitions for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.)....CRLMP Nos. 6532-6533/2017(Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 09/10/2015in WPCRL No. 4765/2014 and WPCRL No. 4766/2014 passed by the HighCourt of Bombay)SHAMIM KHAN Petitioner(s) VERSUSDEBASHISH CHAKRABARTY AND ORS ETC ETC Respondent(s)(with appln. (s) for c/delay in filing SLP and office report)Date : 21/04/2017 These petitions were called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RANJAN GOGOI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN SINHAFor Petitioner(s) Mr. Sanjay Parikh, Adv.Ms. Ninni Susan Thoman, Adv. Mr. Pukhrambam Ramesh Kumar,Adv.Mr. Uday Manaktala, Adv. For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E RHeard the learned counsel for the petitionerand perused the relevant material. Applications for exemption from filingofficial translation and from filing certified copyof the judgment are allowed. Issue notice on the application forcondonation of delay as well as on the specialleave petitions.(Neetu Khajuria)Court Master (Asha Soni)Court Master

1 ITEM NO.18-MM COURT NO.8 SECTION IIC 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.) Nos.5333-5347/2016 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 05/01/2016 in WP No. 26395/2015 05/01/2016 in WP No. 26396/2015 05/01/2016 in WP No. 26397/2015 05/01/2016 in WP No. 41228/2015 05/01/2016 in WP No. 41229/2015 05/01/2016 in WP No. 41230/2015 05/01/2016 in WP No. 41231/2015 05/01/2016 in WP No. 41232/2015 05/01/2016 in WP No. 41234/2015 05/01/2016 in WP No. 41235/2015 05/01/2016 in WP No. 41237/2015 05/01/2016 in WP No. 41238/2015 05/01/2016 in WP No. 41239/2015 05/01/2016 in WP No. 41240/2015 05/01/2016 in WP No. 41241/2015 passed by the High Court of Karnataka at Bangalore) STATE OF KARNATAKA AND ANR. Petitioner(s) VERSUS B.S. YEDDYURAPPA AND ANR. Respondent(s) (With appln. (s) for permission to file additional documents and interim relief and office report) Date : 18/04/2017 These petitions were mentioned today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK BHUSHAN For Petitioner(s) Mr. Vikas Singh, Sr. Adv. Mr. Joseph Aristotle S.,Adv. Mrs. Priya Aristotle, Adv. Ms. K. Priyadarshini, Adv. Mr. Ashish Yadav, Adv. Ms. Romsha Raj, Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Ranjit Kumar, S. G. Mr. Maninder Singh, A.S.G. Ms. Vimla Sinha, Adv. Mr. A.K. Panda, Sr. Adv. Mr. r. Balasubramanian, Adv. Mr. Prabhas Bajaj, Adv. Ms. Aarti Sharma, Adv. Ms. Anil Katiyar, Adv. Mr. Gurmeet Singh Makker,Adv. Mr. Shubhranshu Padhi,Adv. Mr. Kush Chaturvedi, Adv.

2 UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R List these matters in the third week of July, 2017. (RASHMI DHYANI ) (MALA KUMARI SHARMA) SR.P.A. COURT MASTER

SECTIONIIC IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION PETITION FOR SPECIAL LEAVE TO APPEAL(CRL.)NOS. 53335347 OF 2016 WITH CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION NO. 1152411538 OF 2016 ( Application for permission to file additional documents ) STATE OF KARNATAKA & ANR. .... PETITIONERS VERSUS B.S. YEDDYURAPPA & ANR. .... RESPONDENTS OFFICE REPORT The matters above mentioned were listed before the Hon'ble Court on 13.02.2017, when the Court was pleased to pass the following Order: “ As prayed for, let rejoinder be filed within four weeks. List the petitions on 18 th April, 2017, for disposal.” It is submitted that instant matter is an after notice matter and there are two respondents in the matters. Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 are represented through Mr. Shubhranshu Padhi and Mr. G.S. Makker , Advocates respectively. It is further submitted Mr. Shubhranshu Padhi, Advocate has already filed counter affidavit on behalf of Respondent No. 1 and Mr. Joseph Aristotle S., Advocate has already filed rejoinder affidavit to the counter affidavit . Copy of the same has been included in the Special Leave Petition Paper Books. It is further submitted that Mr. G.S. Makker, Advocate has already filed counter affidavit on behalf of Respondent No. 2. Copy of the same has been included in the Special Leave Petition Paper Books . It is lastly submitted that in view of the order quoted above, Counsel for the Petitioner has not filed rejoinder affidavit to counter affidavit of Respondent No. 2 so far. Service of show cause notice is complete . The matters above mentioned are, therefore, listed before the Hon’ble Court with this office report. DATED this the 17 th day of April, 2017. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

COPY TO : 1. Mr. Joseph Aristotle S., Advocate 2. Mr. Shubhranshu Padhi, Advocate 3. Mr. G.S. Makker, Advocate ASSISTANT REGISTRAR RB

\2161ITEM NO.18-MM COURT NO.8 SECTION IIC S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSPetition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) Nos.5333-5347/2016(Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 05/01/2016in WP No. 26395/2015 05/01/2016 in WP No. 26396/2015 05/01/2016 inWP No. 26397/2015 05/01/2016 in WP No. 41228/2015 05/01/2016 in WPNo. 41229/2015 05/01/2016 in WP No. 41230/2015 05/01/2016 in WP No.41231/2015 05/01/2016 in WP No. 41232/2015 05/01/2016 in WP No.41234/2015 05/01/2016 in WP No. 41235/2015 05/01/2016 in WP No.41237/2015 05/01/2016 in WP No. 41238/2015 05/01/2016 in WP No.41239/2015 05/01/2016 in WP No. 41240/2015 05/01/2016 in WP No.41241/2015 passed by the High Court of Karnataka at Bangalore)STATE OF KARNATAKA AND ANR. Petitioner(s) VERSUSB.S. YEDDYURAPPA AND ANR. Respondent(s)(With appln. (s) for permission to file additional documents and interim relief and office report)Date : 18/04/2017 These petitions were mentioned today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK BHUSHANFor Petitioner(s) Mr. Vikas Singh, Sr. Adv. Mr. Joseph Aristotle S.,Adv. Mrs. Priya Aristotle, Adv. Ms. K. Priyadarshini, Adv. Mr. Ashish Yadav, Adv. Ms. Romsha Raj, Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Ranjit Kumar, S. G. Mr. Maninder Singh, A.S.G. Ms. Vimla Sinha, Adv. Mr. A.K. Panda, Sr. Adv. Mr. r. Balasubramanian, Adv. Mr. Prabhas Bajaj, Adv. Ms. Aarti Sharma, Adv. Ms. Anil Katiyar, Adv. Mr. Gurmeet Singh Makker,Adv. Mr. Shubhranshu Padhi,Adv. Mr. Kush Chaturvedi, Adv.2 UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E RList these matters in the third week of July, 2017. (RASHMI DHYANI ) (MALA KUMARI SHARMA) SR.P.A. COURT MASTER

ITEM NO.5 COURT NO.8 SECTION IIC 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.) Nos. 5333-5347/2016 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 05/01/2016 in WP No. 26395/2015, WP No. 26396/2015, WP No. 26397/2015, WP No. 41228/2015, WP No. 41229/2015, WP No. 41230/2015, WP No. 41231/2015, WP No. 41232/2015, WP No. 41234/2015, WP No. 41235/2015, WP No. 41237/2015, WP No. 41238/2015, WP No. 41239/2015, WP No. 41240/2015 and WP No. 41241/2015 passed by the High Court of Karnataka at Bangalore) STATE OF KARNATAKA AND ANR. Petitioner(s) VERSUS B.S. YEDDYURAPPA AND ANR. Respondent(s) (With appln. (s) for permission to file additional documents, interim relief and office report) Date : 13/02/2017 These petitions were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K. AGRAWAL For Petitioner(s) Mr. Vikas Singh, Sr. Adv. Mr. J oseph Aristotle S., Adv. Ms. Priya Aristotle, Adv. Ms. K. Priyadarshini, Adv. Mr. Ashish Yadav, Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. A. K. Panda, Sr. Adv. Ms. Aishwarya Bhati, Adv. Mr. Adarsh Kumar Tiwari, Adv. Mr. Mukul Singh, Adv. Ms. Vimla Sinha, Adv. Mr. Harvinder Choudhary, Adv. Mr. Gurmeet Singh Makker, Adv. Mr. K. V. Vishwanathan, Sr. Adv. Mr. Shubhranshu Padhi, Adv. Mr. Kush Chaturvedi, Adv. Mr. Gursimran Dillon, Adv. Mr. P. Kwin P., Adv. Mr. Mukunda Rao, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R As prayed for, let rejoinder be filed within four weeks. List the petitions on 18 th April, 2017, for disposal. (Nidhi Ahuja) (Mala Kumari Sharma) Court Master Court Master

SECTIONIIC IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION PETITION FOR SPECIAL LEAVE TO APPEAL(CRL.)NOS. 53335347 OF 2016 WITH CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION NO. 1152411538 OF 2016 ( Application for permission to file additional documents ) STATE OF KARNATAKA & ANR. .... PETITIONERS VERSUS B.S. YEDDYURAPPA & ANR. .... RESPONDENTS OFFICE REPORT The matters above mentioned were listed before the Hon'ble Court on 09.01.2017, when the Court was pleased to pass the following Order: “ List the petitions in the second week of January, 2017. As prayed for, reply be filed in the meantime.” It is submitted that instant matter is an after notice matter and there are two respondents in the matters. Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 are represented through Mr. Shubhranshu Padhi and Mr. G.S. Makker , Advocates resppectively. It is further submitted Mr. Shubhranshu Padhi, Advocate has already filed counter affidavit on behalf of Respondent No. 1 and Mr. Joseph Aristotle S., Advocate has already filed rejoinder affidavit to the counter affidavit . Copy of the same has been included in the Special Leave Petition Paper Books. It is further submitted that Mr. G.S. Makker, Advocate has on 06.02.2017 filed counter affidavit on behalf of Respondent No. 2 and its copy has been sent to advocates for other parties by post. Copy of the counter affidavit is being circulated herewith. Counsel for the Petitioner has not filed rejoinder affidavit to counter affidavit of Respondent No. 2 so far. Service of show cause notice is complete . The matters above mentioned are, therefore, listed before the Hon’ble Court with this office report. DATED this the 9 th day of January, 2017. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

COPY TO : 1. Mr. Joseph Aristotle S., Advocate 2. Mr. Shubhranshu Padhi, Advocate 3. Mr. G.S. Makker, Advocate ASSISTANT REGISTRAR RB

pITEM NO.5 COURT NO.8 SECTION IIC S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSPetition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) Nos. 5333-5347/2016(Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 05/01/2016in WP No. 26395/2015, WP No. 26396/2015, WP No. 26397/2015, WP No.41228/2015, WP No. 41229/2015, WP No. 41230/2015, WP No.41231/2015, WP No. 41232/2015, WP No. 41234/2015, WP No.41235/2015, WP No. 41237/2015, WP No. 41238/2015, WP No.41239/2015, WP No. 41240/2015 and WP No. 41241/2015 passed by theHigh Court of Karnataka at Bangalore)STATE OF KARNATAKA AND ANR. Petitioner(s) VERSUSB.S. YEDDYURAPPA AND ANR. Respondent(s)(With appln. (s) for permission to file additional documents,interim relief and office report)Date : 13/02/2017 These petitions were called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K. AGRAWALFor Petitioner(s) Mr. Vikas Singh, Sr. Adv.Mr. J oseph Aristotle S., Adv.Ms. Priya Aristotle, Adv.Ms. K. Priyadarshini, Adv.Mr. Ashish Yadav, Adv.For Respondent(s) Mr. A. K. Panda, Sr. Adv.Ms. Aishwarya Bhati, Adv.Mr. Adarsh Kumar Tiwari, Adv.Mr. Mukul Singh, Adv.Ms. Vimla Sinha, Adv.Mr. Harvinder Choudhary, Adv.Mr. Gurmeet Singh Makker, Adv.Mr. K. V. Vishwanathan, Sr. Adv.Mr. Shubhranshu Padhi, Adv.Mr. Kush Chaturvedi, Adv.Mr. Gursimran Dillon, Adv.Mr. P. Kwin P., Adv.Mr. Mukunda Rao, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E RAs prayed for, let rejoinder be filed within fourweeks.List the petitions on 18 th April, 2017, for disposal.(Nidhi Ahuja) (Mala Kumari Sharma) Court Master Court Master

1 ITEM NO.10 COURT NO.8 SECTION IIC 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). 5333-5347/2016 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 05/01/2016 passed by the High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru in Writ Petition No. 41228 of 2015 (CM-RES) c/w Writ Petition Nos. 26395/2015, 26396/2015, 26397/2015, 41229/2015, 41230/2015, 41232/2015, 41234/2015, 41235/2015. 41237/2015, 41238/2015, 41239/2015, 41240/2015, 41241/2015 and 41231/2015) STATE OF KARNATAKA AND ANR. Petitioner(s) VERSUS B.S. YEDDYURAPPA AND ANR. Respondent(s) (with appln. (s) for permission to file additional documents and interim relief and office report) Date : 09/01/2017 These petitions were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K. AGRAWAL For Petitioner(s) Mr. Vikas Singh, Sr. Adv. Mr. Joseph Aristotle S.,Adv. Ms. Priya Aristotle, Adv. Ms. K. Priyadarshini, Adv. Ms. Deepika Kalia, Adv. Mr. Kapish Seth, Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. A.K. Panda, Sr. Adv. Ms. Aishwarya Bhati, Adv. Mr. Mukul Singh, Adv. Dr. Nupur Bhati, Adv. Mr. Adarsh Kumar Tiwari, Adv. Mr. Gurmeet Singh Makker,Adv. Mr. K.V. Vishwanathan, Sr. Adv. Mr. Kush Chaturvedi, Adv. Mr. Shubhranshu Padhi,Adv. Mr. Gursimran Dillon, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R

2 Mr. A.K. Panda, learned senior counsel states that respondent no. 2 shall be filing counter affidavit. Let counter affidavit be filed within two weeks. Rejoinder, if any, shall be filed within two weeks thereafter. List after four weeks. (Ashwani Thakur) (Mala Kumari Sharma ) COURT MASTER COURT MASTER

ò1ITEM NO.10 COURT NO.8 SECTION IIC S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSPetition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s).5333-5347/2016(Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 05/01/2016passed by the High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru in Writ PetitionNo. 41228 of 2015 (CM-RES) c/w Writ Petition Nos. 26395/2015,26396/2015, 26397/2015, 41229/2015, 41230/2015, 41232/2015,41234/2015, 41235/2015. 41237/2015, 41238/2015, 41239/2015,41240/2015, 41241/2015 and 41231/2015)STATE OF KARNATAKA AND ANR. Petitioner(s) VERSUSB.S. YEDDYURAPPA AND ANR. Respondent(s)(with appln. (s) for permission to file additional documents and interim relief and office report)Date : 09/01/2017 These petitions were called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K. AGRAWALFor Petitioner(s) Mr. Vikas Singh, Sr. Adv. Mr. Joseph Aristotle S.,Adv. Ms. Priya Aristotle, Adv. Ms. K. Priyadarshini, Adv. Ms. Deepika Kalia, Adv. Mr. Kapish Seth, Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. A.K. Panda, Sr. Adv. Ms. Aishwarya Bhati, Adv. Mr. Mukul Singh, Adv. Dr. Nupur Bhati, Adv. Mr. Adarsh Kumar Tiwari, Adv. Mr. Gurmeet Singh Makker,Adv.Mr. K.V. Vishwanathan, Sr. Adv. Mr. Kush Chaturvedi, Adv. Mr. Shubhranshu Padhi,Adv.Mr. Gursimran Dillon, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R2Mr. A.K. Panda, learned senior counsel states that respondentno. 2 shall be filing counter affidavit.Let counter affidavit be filed within two weeks. Rejoinder, if any, shall be filed within two weeks thereafter.List after four weeks. (Ashwani Thakur) (Mala Kumari Sharma ) COURT MASTER COURT MASTER

SECTIONIIC IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION PETITION FOR SPECIAL LEAVE TO APPEAL(CRL.)NOS. 53335347 OF 2016 WITH CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION NO. 1152411538 OF 2016 ( Application for permission to file additional documents ) STATE OF KARNATAKA & ANR. .... PETITIONERS VERSUS B.S. YEDDYURAPPA & ANR. .... RESPONDENTS OFFICE REPORT The matters above mentioned were listed before the Hon'ble Court on 15.11.2016, when the Court was pleased to pass the following Order: “ List the petitions in the second week of January, 2017. As prayed for, reply be filed in the meantime.” It is submitted that instant matter is an after notice matter and there are two respondents in the matters. Respondent No. 1 is represented through Mr. Shubhranshu Padhi, Advocate and he has already filed counter affidavit and Mr. Joseph Aristotle S., Advocate has already filed rejoinder affidavit to counter affidavit . Copy of the counter affidavit and rejoinder affidavit have been included in the paper books. It is further submitted that Respondent No. 2 is represented through Mr. G.S. Makker, Advocate and in view of order quoted above he has not filed reply so far. Service of show cause notice is complete . The matters above mentioned are, therefore, listed before the Hon’ble Court with this office report. DATED this the 6 th day of January, 2017. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR COPY TO : 1. Mr. Joseph Aristotle S., Advocate 2. Mr. Shubhranshu Padhi, Advocate 3. Mr. G.S. Makker, Advocate ASSISTANT REGISTRAR RB

1 ITEM NO.37 COURT NO.3 SECTION II 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). 5838/2014 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 30/04/2014 in SBCRP No. 341/2014 passed by the High Court Of Rajasthan At Jaipur) MANJU SURANA Petitioner(s) VERSUS SUNIL ARORA AND ORS Respondent(s) (With appln.(s) for deletion of the name of respondent No.1 from the array of parties and exemption from filing O.T and office report) WITH SLP(Crl) No. 1092/2015 (With Office Report) Date : 03/01/2017 These petitions were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J. CHELAMESWAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAFULLA C. PANT For Petitioner(s) Mr. Prashant Bhushan,Adv. Mr. Rohit Kumar Singh,Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Gautam Jha,Adv. Mrs. Sweta Jha,Adv. Mr. Merusagar Samantaray,Adv. Ms. Viddusshi ,Adv. Ms. Lhingneiyah,Adv. Mr. Ajay Kapur,AAG Mr. Anirudh Singh,Adv. Mr. Milind Kumar,Adv. Mr. Nishant Ramakantrao Katneshwarkar,Adv. Mr. Ashok Kumar Juneja ,Adv. Mr. Chand Qureshi,Adv. Mr. Vijendra Kasana,Adv. Mr. Rajeev Sharma,Adv.

2 Mr. Vikas Singh,Sr.Adv. Mr. Satya Mitra Garg,Adv. Mr. Anchit Sharma,Adv. Mrs. Manju Aggarwal,Adv. Mr. H.D. Thanvi,Adv. Ms. Preeti Thanvi,Adv. Mr. Rishi Matoliya,Adv. Mr. Balkishan Ladhania,Adv. Ms. Ishita Jakhmola,Adv. Mr. U.N. Goyal,Adv. Mr. Nachiketa Joshi,Adv. Mrs. Sucheta Joshi,Adv. Mr. Ritwiz Rishabh,Adv. Mr. Ashok Kumar Juneja,Adv. Mr. Chand Qureshi,Adv. Mr. Vijendra Kasana,Adv. Mr. Rajeev Sharma,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R List the application (Crl.M.P.No.161/2015) for deletion of the name of respondent No.1 in SLP(Crl)No.5838/2014 for final hearing. [O.P. SHARMA] [RAJINDER KAUR] AR-CUM-PS COURT MASTER

SECTION II MATTER FOR :03.01.2017 COURT NO. 3 ITEM NO. 37 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION PETITION FOR SPECIAL LEAVE TO APPEAL(CRIMINAL) NO.5838 OF 2014 WITH CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION NO. 161 OF 2015 (Application for deletion of the name of respondent No.1) Manju Surana ...Petitioner VERSUS Sunil Arora and Ors ...Respondents AND PETITION FOR SPECIAL LEAVE TO APPEAL(CRIMINAL) NO.1092 OF 2015 Ambhuj Kumar Sharma ...Petitioner VERSUS Ajay Kumar Gehlot and Anr ...Respondents OFFICE REPORT SLP(Crl) No.5838/2014 The matter abovementioned was listed before the Hon'ble Court on 11 th August, 2014, when the Hon'ble Court was pleased to pass the following Order: “ Issue notice returnable in six weeks. Notice will be issued to all the respondents except respondent No. 4 for the time being. Dasti in addition to the ordinary prcocess is permitted. ” Accordingly show cause notice was issued to all the respondents except respondent No. 4 by registered A.D.post as well as by dasti through counsel for the Petitioner on 20.08.2014. It is submitted that Mr. Satya Mitra Garg,Advocate; Mr. Merusagar Samantaray,Advocate;Mr.Gautam Jha,Advocate,Mr. Nishant R. Katneshwarkar, Advocate;Mr.Nachiketa Joshi, Advocate and Mr. Rajeev Sharma,Advocate has filed vakalatnama on behalf of respondent Nos.1,2,3,5,6 and 8 respectively. A.D.Cards duly signed have been received back from respondent No.7 but no one has entered appearance on his behalf so far.

2 It is further submitted that Mr. Satya Mitra Garg,Advocate has on 03.12.2014 filed an application for deletion of name of respondent No. 1 from the array of parties which was registered as Crl.M.P. No. 161/2015 and subsequently listed before Hon'ble Judge in Chambers on 13.07.2015 when the following Order was passed. “Issue notice on Crl.M.P. No. 161/2015 returnable in four weeks.” It is submitted that pursuant to this Hon'ble Court's order dated 13.07.2015 in Crl.M.P. No. 161/2015 (Application for deletion of respondent No.1) show cause notice was issued to all the parties on 07.04.2016. Neither A.D.Card nor unserved cover containing show cause notice has been received back in respect of respondent No. 7 and Respondent No. 2,3,5,6 and 8 are already represented through their respective Advocates. It is submitted that Mr. Prashant Bhushan,Advocate has filed counter affidavit to the application for deletion filed by respondent No. 1. (Copy of the same has been included in the SLP paper books). It is further submitted that Mr. Satya Mitra Garg, Advocate counsel for the respondent No. 1 has filed rejoinder affidavit to the counter affidavit to the application for deletion.(Copy of the Rejoinder affidavit is included in the SLP paper books.) It is further submitted that matter abovementioned was listed before Hon'ble Chamber Judge on 08.08.2016; when the following Order was passed: “List the matter before the Court.” Service of show cause notice is incomplete on respondent No. 7 in the application and complete on all other respondents in the application for deletion of respondent No. 1 in the matter above mentioned. However service of show cause notice issued in the main matter pursuant to this Hon'ble Court's Order dated 11.08.2014 is complete on respondents.

3 SLP(Crl) No.1092/2015 The matter abovementioned was listed before the Hon'ble Court on 13 th February, 2015; when the following Order was passed: “Issue notice Tag with SLP(Crl) No. 5838/2014.” Accordingly notice was issued to both the respondents on 28.02.2015 through registered A.D.Post. It is submitted that Mr. Rishi Matoliya,Advocate and Mr. Milind Kumar, Advocate has filed vakalatnama and counter affidavit on behalf of respondent No. 1 and 2 respectively.(Copy of the counter affidavit is included in the SLP paper books) and matter was time to time listed before Ld.Registrar Court and lastly on 05.04.2016; when the following Order was passed: “ Respondent No.1 has not filed counter affidavit despite last opportunity granted.Further opportunity is declined. Respondent No. 2 has already filed counter affidavit. Registry to process the matter for being listed before the Hon'ble Court as per rules.” Service of show cause notice is complete on both the respondents. The matters abovementioned are listed before the Ld.Registrar Court with this office report. DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF August, 2016. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR Copy to : Mr.Prashant Bhushan,Advocate Mr.Rajeev Sharma,Advocate Mr. Gautam Jha,Advocate Mr. Nachiketa Joshi,Advocate Mr. Sanjay Jain, Advocate Mr. Merusagar Samantaray,Advocate Mr. Nishant R.Katneshwarkar, Advocate Mr. Rishi Matoliya,Advocate Mr. Milind Kumar,Advocate ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

SECTION II MATTER FOR : 08.08.2016 COURT NO. 15 ITEM NO. 1 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION NO. 161 OF 2015 (Application for deletion of the name of respondent No.1) IN PETITION FOR SPECIAL LEAVE TO APPEAL(CRIMINAL) NO.5838 OF 2014 Manju Surana ...Petitioner VERSUS Sunil Arora and Ors ...Respondents REVISED OFFICE REPORT The matter abovementioned was listed before the Court Hon'ble Judge in Chambers on 13.07.2015 when the following Order was passed: “Issue notice on Crl.M.P. No. 161/2015 returnable in four weeks .” It is submitted that Mr. Satya Mitra Garg, Advocate has on 29.03.2016 filed Vakalatnama on behalf of respondent No. 1 after obtaining NOC from erstwhile Advocate Mr.Sanjay Jain. It is further submitted that Counsel for the Respondent No. 1,2,3,5,6 and 8 has not filed counter affidavit on their behalf so far. It is submitted that pursuant to this Hon'ble Court's order dated 13.07.2015 in Crl.M.P. No. 161/2015 (Application for deletion of respondent No.1) show cause notice was issued to all the parties on 07.04.2016. Neither A.D.Card nor unserved cover containing show cause notice has been received back in respect of respondent No. 7 and Respondent No. 2,3,5,6 and 8 are already represented through their respective Advocates. It is submitted that Mr. Prashant Bhushan,Advocate has filed counter affidavit to the application for deletion filed by respondent No. 1. (Copy of the same has been included in the SLP paper books).

It is further submitted that Mr. Satya Mitra Garg, Advocate counsel for the respondent No. 1 has filed rejoinder affidavit to the counter affidavit to the application for deletion.(Copy of the Rejoinder affidavit is included in the SLP paper books.) It is further submitted that matter abovementioned was listed before Ld.Registrar Court on 21.07.2016; when the following Order was passed: “ Service of notice on the application for deletion of respondent No. 1 is complete. Despite last opportunity have been granted, respondent Nos. 2,3,5,6 and 8 have not filed counter affidavit. Registry to process the application for deletion of respondent No. 1 for listing before the Hon'ble Judge in Chambers.” Service of show cause notice is complete on all the respondents but incomplete on respondent No. 7 in the application for deletion of respondent No. 1 in the matter abovementioned. However service of show cause notice issued in the main matter pursuant to this Hon'ble Court's Order dated 11.08.2014 is complete on all respondents. The matter abovementioned are listed before the Hon'ble Chamber Judge with this office report. DATED THIS THE 06TH DAY OF August, 2016. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR Copy to : Mr. Prashant Bhushan,Advocate Mr. Rajeev Sharma,Advocate Mr. Gautam Jha,Advocate Mr. Nachiketa Joshi,Advocate Mr. Satya Mitra Garg, Advocate Mr. Merusagar Samantaray,Advocate Mr. Nishant R.Katneshwarkar, Advocate ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

SECTION II MATTER FOR : 09.05.2016 R.COURT NO. 01 ITEM NO. 37 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION PETITION FOR SPECIAL LEAVE TO APPEAL(CRIMINAL) NO.5838 OF 2014 WITH CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION NO. 161 OF 2015 (Application for deletion of the name of respondent No.1) Manju Surana ...Petitioner VERSUS Sunil Arora and Ors ...Respondents OFFICE REPORT SLP(Crl) No.5838/2014 The matter abovementioned was listed before the Hon'ble Court on 29.02.2016, when the Hon'ble Court was pleased to pass the following Order: “ Four weeks time is granted to the learned Counsel for Respondent Nos. 1,2,3,5,6, and 8 to file the counter affidavit. None appears for Respondent No. 7 despite due service. The time granted as last opportunity for filing counter affidavit to the Respondent No. 1 has not expired as per order dated 09.02.2016 of this Court. As such he is at liberty to file the same within the granted time period. Respondent No. 2 has already filed the counter affidavit. Four weeks time is granted to the learned Counsel for Respondent No. 3 to file the counter affidavit. List again on 09.05.2016.” It is submitted that Mr. Satya Mitra Garg, Advocate has on 29.03.2016 filed Vakalatnama on behalf of respondent No. 1 after obtaining NOC from erstwhile Advocate Mr.Sanjay Jain. It is further submitted that Counsel for the Respondent No. 1,2,3,5,6 and 8 has not filed counter affidavit on their behalf so far. It is submitted that Mr. Prashant Bhushan,Advocate has filed counter affidavit to the application for deletion filed by respondent No. 1 and the same was defective for not serving the copy to the counsel for the Respondent Nos.3,6 and 8.Counsel for the Petitioner has been intimated vide this Registry's letter dated 10.09.2015.Defects are not cured so far.

It is further submitted that Mr. Sanjay Jain, Advocate who was earlier counsel for the respondent No. 1 has filed rejoinder affidavit to the counter affidavit to the application for deletion filed by Mr.Sanjay Jain and the same was defective for the reason that it was not served to the counsel for the respondent No. 2, 5 and 8. Counsel for the respondent has been intimated vide this Registry's letter dated 14.10.2015. Defects are not cured so far. It is further submitted that show cause notice in respect of directions of Hon'ble Court's order dated 13.07.2015 in Crl.M.P. No. 161/2015 (Application for deletion of respondent No.1) was issued to all the parties on 07.04.2016 and neither A.D.Card nor unserved cover containing show cause notice has been received back in respect of all the respondents so far. Service of show cause notice is incomplete on all the respondents in the application for deletion of respondent No. 1 in the matter abovementioned. However service of show cause notice issued in the main matter pursuant to this Hon'ble Court's Order dated 11.08.2014 is complete on respondents. The matter abovementioned are listed before the Ld.Registrar Court with this office report. DATED THIS THE 05TH DAY OF April, 2016. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR Copy to : Mr. Prashant Bhushan,Advocate Mr. Rajeev Sharma,Advocate Mr. Gautam Jha,Advocate Mr. Nachiketa Joshi,Advocate Mr. Satya Mitra Garg, Advocate Mr. Merusagar Samantaray,Advocate Mr. Nishant R.Katneshwarkar, Advocate ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

SECTION II MATTER FOR : 29.02.2016 R.COURT NO. 01 ITEM NO. 23 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION PETITION FOR SPECIAL LEAVE TO APPEAL(CRIMINAL) NO.5838 OF 2014 WITH CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION NO. 161 OF 2015 (Application for deletion of the name of respondent No.1) Manju Surana ...Petitioner VERSUS Sunil Arora and Ors ...Respondents AND PETITION FOR SPECIAL LEAVE TO APPEAL(CRIMINAL) NO.1092 OF 2015 Ambhuj Kumar Sharma ...Petitioner VERSUS Ajay Kumar Gehlot and Anr ...Respondents OFFICE REPORT SLP(Crl) No.5838/2014 The matter abovementioned was listed before the Hon'ble Court on 11 th August, 2014, when the Hon'ble Court was pleased to pass the following Order: “ Issue notice returnable in six weeks. Notice will be issued to all the respondents except respondent No. 4 for the time being. Dasti in addition to the ordinary prcocess is permitted. ” Accordingly show cause notice returnable on 19 th September, 2014 was issued to all the respondents except respondent No. 4 by registered A.D.post as well as by dasti through counsel for the Petitioner on 20.08.2014. It is submitted that Mr. Sanjay Jain,Advocate; Mr. Merusagar Samantaray,Advocate;Mr.Gautam Jha,Advocate,Mr. Nishant R. Katneshwarkar, Advocate;Mr.Nachiketa Joshi, Advocate and Mr. Rajeev Sharma,Advocate has filed vakalatnam on behalf of respondent Nos.1,2,3,5,6 and 8 respectively. A.D.Cards duly signed have been received back from respondent No.7 but no one has entered appearance on his behalf so far.

2 It is further submitted that Mr. Sanjay Jain,Advocate has on 03.12.2014 filed an application for deletion of name of respondent No. 1 from the array of parties which is registered as Crl.M.P. No. 161/2015 and subsequently listed before Hon'ble Judge in Chambers on 13.07.2015 when the following Order was passed. “Issue notice on Crl.M.P. No. 161/2015 returnable in four weeks.” It is further submitted that Mr. Sanjay Jain,Advocate has not filed the spare copies hence notice could not be issued so far. Service of show cause notice is incomplete on all the respondents in the application for deletion of respondent No. 7 in the matter abovementioned. However service of show cause notice issued in the main matter pursuant to this Hon'ble Court's Order dated 11.08.2014 is complete on respondents. SLP(Crl) No.1092/2015 The matter abovementioned was listed before Ld.Registrar Court on 09 th February, 2016; when the following Order was passed: “ Four weeks' time as last opportunity is granted to respondent No. 1 for filing counter affidavit. Respondent No. 2 has already filed the counter affidavit. List again on 05.04.2016.” It is submitted that counsel for the respondent No. 1 has not filed counter affidavit on his behalf so far. Service of show cause notice is complete on both the respondents. The matters abovementioned are listed before the Ld.Registrar Court with this office report. DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF February, 2016. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR Copy to : Mr.Prashant Bhushan,Advocate Mr.Rajeev Sharma,Advocate Mr. Gautam Jha,Advocate Mr. Nachiketa Joshi,Advocate Mr. Sanjay Jain, Advocate

Mr. Merusagar Samantaray,Advocate Mr. Nishant R.Katneshwarkar, Advocate ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

Ø1ITEM NO.37 COURT NO.3 SECTION II S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSPetition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s). 5838/2014(Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 30/04/2014in SBCRP No. 341/2014 passed by the High Court Of Rajasthan At Jaipur)MANJU SURANA Petitioner(s) VERSUSSUNIL ARORA AND ORS Respondent(s)(With appln.(s) for deletion of the name of respondent No.1 from the array of parties and exemption from filing O.T and office report)WITHSLP(Crl) No. 1092/2015(With Office Report)Date : 03/01/2017 These petitions were called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J. CHELAMESWAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAFULLA C. PANTFor Petitioner(s) Mr. Prashant Bhushan,Adv.Mr. Rohit Kumar Singh,Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Gautam Jha,Adv.Mrs. Sweta Jha,Adv. Mr. Merusagar Samantaray,Adv.Ms. Viddusshi ,Adv.Ms. Lhingneiyah,Adv.Mr. Ajay Kapur,AAGMr. Anirudh Singh,Adv.Mr. Milind Kumar,Adv. Mr. Nishant Ramakantrao Katneshwarkar,Adv.Mr. Ashok Kumar Juneja ,Adv.Mr. Chand Qureshi,Adv.Mr. Vijendra Kasana,Adv. Mr. Rajeev Sharma,Adv.2 Mr. Vikas Singh,Sr.Adv.Mr. Satya Mitra Garg,Adv.Mr. Anchit Sharma,Adv.Mrs. Manju Aggarwal,Adv.Mr. H.D. Thanvi,Adv.Ms. Preeti Thanvi,Adv.Mr. Rishi Matoliya,Adv.Mr. Balkishan Ladhania,Adv.Ms. Ishita Jakhmola,Adv.Mr. U.N. Goyal,Adv.Mr. Nachiketa Joshi,Adv.Mrs. Sucheta Joshi,Adv.Mr. Ritwiz Rishabh,Adv.Mr. Ashok Kumar Juneja,Adv.Mr. Chand Qureshi,Adv.Mr. Vijendra Kasana,Adv.Mr. Rajeev Sharma,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E RList the application (Crl.M.P.No.161/2015) for deletion of thename of respondent No.1 in SLP(Crl)No.5838/2014 for final hearing.[O.P. SHARMA] [RAJINDER KAUR] AR-CUM-PS COURT MASTER

ITEM NO.64 COURT NO.10 SECTION IIC 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.) Nos. 5333-5347/2016 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 05/01/2016 in WP No. 26395/2015, WP No. 26396/2015, WP No. 26397/2015, WP No. 41228/2015, WP No. 41229/2015, WP No. 41230/2015, WP No. 41231/2015, WP No. 41232/2015, WP No. 41234/2015, WP No. 41235/2015, WP No. 41237/2015, WP No. 41238/2015, WP No. 41239/2015, WP No. 41240/2015 and WP No. 41241/2015 passed by the High Court of Karnataka at Bangalore) STATE OF KARNATAKA AND ANR. Petitioner(s) VERSUS B.S. YEDDYURAPPA AND ANR. Respondent(s) (With appln. (s) for permission to file additional documents, interim relief and office report) Date : 15/11/2016 These petitions were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE L. NAGESWARA RAO For Parties Mr. Vikas Singh, Sr. Adv. Mr. Joseph Aristotle S., Adv. Ms. Priya Aristotle, Adv. Ms. K. Priyadarshini, Adv. Mr. A. K. Panda, Sr. Adv. Ms. Vimla Sinha, Adv. Mr. H. C. Choudhary, Adv. Mr. Gurmeet Singh Makker, Adv. Mr. Harvinder Choudhary, Adv. Mr. K. V. Vishwanathan, Sr. Adv. Mr. Shubhranshu Padhi, Adv. Mr. Kush Chaturvedi, Adv. Mr. Abhishek Kaushik, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R List the petitions in the second week of January, 2017. As prayed for, reply be filed in the meantime. (Nidhi Ahuja) (Mala Kumari Sharma) Court Master Court Master

SECTIONIIC IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION PETITION FOR SPECIAL LEAVE TO APPEAL(CRL.)NOS. 53335347 OF 2016 WITH CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION NO. 1152411538 OF 2016 ( Application for permission to file additional documents ) STATE OF KARNATAKA & ANR. .... PETITIONERS VERSUS B.S. YEDDYURAPPA & ANR. .... RESPONDENTS OFFICE REPORT The matters above mentioned were listed before the Hon'ble Court on 18.10.2016, when the Court was pleased to pass the following Order: “ In view of letter circulated by the learned counsel for the petitioners, matters stand adjourned for four weeks.” It is submitted that instant matter is an after notice matter and there are two respondents in the matters. Respondent No. 1 is represented through Mr. Shubhranshu Padhi, Advocate and he has already filed counter affidavit. Copy of the counter affidavit has been included in the paper books. Respondent No. 2 is represented through Mr. G.S. Makker, Advocate. It is further submitted that in view of letter dated 17.10.2016 circulated before the Hon'ble Court on 18.10.2016, Mr. Joseph Aristotle S., Counsel for the Petitioner has on 07.11.2016 filed rejoinder affidavit to counter affidavit filed by Respondent no. 1. Copy of the rejoinder affidavit is being circulated. Service of show cause notice is complete . The matters above mentioned are, therefore, listed before the Hon’ble Court with this office report. DATED this the 8 th day of November, 2016. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR COPY TO : 1. Mr. Joseph Aristotle S., Advocate 2. Mr. Shubhranshu Padhi, Advocate 3. Mr. G.S. Makker, Advocate ASSISTANT REGISTRAR RB

˜ITEM NO.64 COURT NO.10 SECTION IIC S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSPetition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) Nos. 5333-5347/2016(Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 05/01/2016in WP No. 26395/2015, WP No. 26396/2015, WP No. 26397/2015, WP No.41228/2015, WP No. 41229/2015, WP No. 41230/2015, WP No.41231/2015, WP No. 41232/2015, WP No. 41234/2015, WP No.41235/2015, WP No. 41237/2015, WP No. 41238/2015, WP No.41239/2015, WP No. 41240/2015 and WP No. 41241/2015 passed by theHigh Court of Karnataka at Bangalore)STATE OF KARNATAKA AND ANR. Petitioner(s) VERSUSB.S. YEDDYURAPPA AND ANR. Respondent(s)(With appln. (s) for permission to file additional documents,interim relief and office report)Date : 15/11/2016 These petitions were called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE L. NAGESWARA RAOFor Parties Mr. Vikas Singh, Sr. Adv.Mr. Joseph Aristotle S., Adv.Ms. Priya Aristotle, Adv.Ms. K. Priyadarshini, Adv. Mr. A. K. Panda, Sr. Adv.Ms. Vimla Sinha, Adv.Mr. H. C. Choudhary, Adv.Mr. Gurmeet Singh Makker, Adv.Mr. Harvinder Choudhary, Adv.Mr. K. V. Vishwanathan, Sr. Adv.Mr. Shubhranshu Padhi, Adv.Mr. Kush Chaturvedi, Adv.Mr. Abhishek Kaushik, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E RList the petitions in the second week of January, 2017.As prayed for, reply be filed in the meantime. (Nidhi Ahuja) (Mala Kumari Sharma) Court Master Court Master

ITEM NO.6 COURT NO.9 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). 5333-5347/2016 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 05/01/2016 in WP No. 26395/2015 05/01/2016 in WP No. 26396/2015 05/01/2016 in WP No. 26397/2015 05/01/2016 in WP No. 41228/2015 05/01/2016 in WP No. 41229/2015 05/01/2016 in WP No. 41230/2015 05/01/2016 in WP No. 41231/2015 05/01/2016 in WP No. 41232/2015 05/01/2016 in WP No. 41234/2015 05/01/2016 in WP No. 41235/2015 05/01/2016 in WP No. 41237/2015 05/01/2016 in WP No. 41238/2015 05/01/2016 in WP No. 41239/2015 05/01/2016 in WP No. 41240/2015 05/01/2016 in WP No. 41241/2015 passed by the High Court Of Karnataka At Bangalore) STATE OF KARNATAKA AND ANR. Petitioner(s) VERSUS B.S. YEDDYURAPPA AND ANR. Respondent(s) (with appln. (s) for permission to file additional documents and interim relief and office report) Date : 18/10/2016 These petitions were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA For Petitioner(s) Mr. Joseph Aristotle S.,Adv. Ms. Priya Aristotle, Adv. Ms. K. Priyadarshini, Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Shubhranshu Padhi,Adv. Mr. Kush Chaturvedi, Adv. Mr. Gursimran Dillon, Adv. Mr. A.K. Panda, Sr. Adv. Mr. Gurmeet Singh Makker,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R In view of letter circulated by the learned counsel for the petitioners, matters stand adjourned for four weeks. (Ashwani Thakur) (Mala Kumari Sharma ) COURT MASTER COURT MASTER

\200ITEM NO.6 COURT NO.9 SECTION II C S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSPetition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s).5333-5347/2016(Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 05/01/2016in WP No. 26395/2015 05/01/2016 in WP No. 26396/2015 05/01/2016 inWP No. 26397/2015 05/01/2016 in WP No. 41228/2015 05/01/2016 in WPNo. 41229/2015 05/01/2016 in WP No. 41230/2015 05/01/2016 in WP No.41231/2015 05/01/2016 in WP No. 41232/2015 05/01/2016 in WP No.41234/2015 05/01/2016 in WP No. 41235/2015 05/01/2016 in WP No.41237/2015 05/01/2016 in WP No. 41238/2015 05/01/2016 in WP No.41239/2015 05/01/2016 in WP No. 41240/2015 05/01/2016 in WP No.41241/2015 passed by the High Court Of Karnataka At Bangalore)STATE OF KARNATAKA AND ANR. Petitioner(s) VERSUSB.S. YEDDYURAPPA AND ANR. Respondent(s)(with appln. (s) for permission to file additional documents and interim relief and office report)Date : 18/10/2016 These petitions were called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE N.V. RAMANAFor Petitioner(s) Mr. Joseph Aristotle S.,Adv. Ms. Priya Aristotle, Adv. Ms. K. Priyadarshini, Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Shubhranshu Padhi,Adv.Mr. Kush Chaturvedi, Adv. Mr. Gursimran Dillon, Adv. Mr. A.K. Panda, Sr. Adv. Mr. Gurmeet Singh Makker,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E RIn view of letter circulated by the learned counsel for thepetitioners, matters stand adjourned for four weeks. (Ashwani Thakur) (Mala Kumari Sharma ) COURT MASTER COURT MASTER

ITEM NO.3 COURT NO.11 SECTION IIB 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). 5333-5347/2016 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 05/01/2016 in WP No. 26395/2015 05/01/2016 in WP No. 26396/2015 05/01/2016 in WP No. 26397/2015 05/01/2016 in WP No. 41228/2015 05/01/2016 in WP No. 41229/2015 05/01/2016 in WP No. 41230/2015 05/01/2016 in WP No. 41231/2015 05/01/2016 in WP No. 41232/2015 05/01/2016 in WP No. 41234/2015 05/01/2016 in WP No. 41235/2015 05/01/2016 in WP No. 41237/2015 05/01/2016 in WP No. 41238/2015 05/01/2016 in WP No. 41239/2015 05/01/2016 in WP No. 41240/2015 05/01/2016 in WP No. 41241/2015 passed by the High Court Of Karnataka At Bangalore) STATE OF KARNATAKA AND ANR. Petitioner(s) VERSUS B.S. YEDDYURAPPA AND ANR. Respondent(s) (with appln. (s) for permission to file additional documents and interim relief and office report) Date : 19/09/2016 These petitions were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA For Petitioner(s) Mr. Joseph Aristotle S.,Adv. Ms. Priya Aristotle, Adv. Mr. Rajesh Kumar Singh, Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Shubhranshu Padhi,Adv. Mr. Kush Chaturvedi, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R In view of letter circulated by the learned counsel for the petitioners, matter stands adjourned for four weeks. (Ashwani Thakur) (Tapan Kr. Chakraborty ) COURT MASTER COURT MASTER

SECTIONIIB IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION PETITION FOR SPECIAL LEAVE TO APPEAL(CRL.)NOS. 53335347 OF 2016 WITH CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION NO. 1152411538 OF 2016 ( Application for permission to file additional documents ) STATE OF KARNATAKA & ANR. .... PETITIONERS VERSUS B.S. YEDDYURAPPA & ANR. .... RESPONDENTS OFFICE REPORT The matters above mentioned were listed before the Hon'ble Court on 16.08.2016, when the Court was pleased to pass the following Order: “ Counter affidavit be filed within four weeks. List after four weeks.” It is submitted that instant matter is an after notice matter and there are two respondents in the matters. Respondent No. 1 is represented through Mr. Shubhranshu Padhi, Advocate. Neither A.D. Card nor the unserved cover containing the show cause notice issued on 22.07.2016 has been received back, so far. Pursuant to this Court's order quoted above, Mr. Shubhranshu Padhi, Advocate was required to file Counter Affidavit but he has not filed the same , so far . Service of show cause notice is not complete in respect of Respondent No. 2 . The matters above mentioned are, therefore, listed before the Hon’ble Court with this office report. DATED this the 16th day of September, 2016. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR COPY TO : 1. Mr. Joseph Aristotle S., Advocate 2. Mr. Shubhranshu Padhi, Advocate ASSISTANT REGISTRAR c4

æITEM NO.3 COURT NO.11 SECTION IIB S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSPetition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s).5333-5347/2016(Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 05/01/2016in WP No. 26395/2015 05/01/2016 in WP No. 26396/2015 05/01/2016 inWP No. 26397/2015 05/01/2016 in WP No. 41228/2015 05/01/2016 in WPNo. 41229/2015 05/01/2016 in WP No. 41230/2015 05/01/2016 in WP No.41231/2015 05/01/2016 in WP No. 41232/2015 05/01/2016 in WP No.41234/2015 05/01/2016 in WP No. 41235/2015 05/01/2016 in WP No.41237/2015 05/01/2016 in WP No. 41238/2015 05/01/2016 in WP No.41239/2015 05/01/2016 in WP No. 41240/2015 05/01/2016 in WP No.41241/2015 passed by the High Court Of Karnataka At Bangalore)STATE OF KARNATAKA AND ANR. Petitioner(s) VERSUSB.S. YEDDYURAPPA AND ANR. Respondent(s)(with appln. (s) for permission to file additional documents andinterim relief and office report)Date : 19/09/2016 These petitions were called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE N.V. RAMANAFor Petitioner(s) Mr. Joseph Aristotle S.,Adv. Ms. Priya Aristotle, Adv. Mr. Rajesh Kumar Singh, Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Shubhranshu Padhi,Adv. Mr. Kush Chaturvedi, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E RIn view of letter circulated by the learned counsel for thepetitioners, matter stands adjourned for four weeks. (Ashwani Thakur) (Tapan Kr. Chakraborty ) COURT MASTER COURT MASTER

ITEM NO.7 COURT NO.10 SECTION IIB 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). 5333-5347/2016 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 05/01/2016 in WP No. 26395/2015 05/01/2016 in WP No. 26396/2015 05/01/2016 in WP No. 26397/2015 05/01/2016 in WP No. 41228/2015 05/01/2016 in WP No. 41229/2015 05/01/2016 in WP No. 41230/2015 05/01/2016 in WP No. 41231/2015 05/01/2016 in WP No. 41232/2015 05/01/2016 in WP No. 41234/2015 05/01/2016 in WP No. 41235/2015 05/01/2016 in WP No. 41237/2015 05/01/2016 in WP No. 41238/2015 05/01/2016 in WP No. 41239/2015 05/01/2016 in WP No. 41240/2015 05/01/2016 in WP No. 41241/2015 passed by the High Court Of Karnataka At Bangalore) STATE OF KARNATAKA AND ANR. Petitioner(s) VERSUS B.S. YEDDYURAPPA AND ANR. Respondent(s) (WITH APPLN. (S) FOR PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS AND INTERIM RELIEF AND OFFICE REPORT) Date : 16/08/2016 These petitions were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE D.Y. CHANDRACHUD For Petitioner(s) Mr. Joseph Aristotle S.,Adv. Ms. Priya Aristotle, Adv. Mr. Rajesh Kumar Singh, Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. K.V. Vishwanathan, Sr. Adv. Mr. Shubhranshu Padhi, Adv. Mr. Kush Chaturvedi, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Counter affidavit be filed within four weeks. List after four weeks. (Ashwani Thakur) (Tapan Kr. Chakraborty ) COURT MASTER COURT MASTER

°ITEM NO.7 COURT NO.10 SECTION IIB S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSPetition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s).5333-5347/2016(Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 05/01/2016in WP No. 26395/2015 05/01/2016 in WP No. 26396/2015 05/01/2016 inWP No. 26397/2015 05/01/2016 in WP No. 41228/2015 05/01/2016 in WPNo. 41229/2015 05/01/2016 in WP No. 41230/2015 05/01/2016 in WP No.41231/2015 05/01/2016 in WP No. 41232/2015 05/01/2016 in WP No.41234/2015 05/01/2016 in WP No. 41235/2015 05/01/2016 in WP No.41237/2015 05/01/2016 in WP No. 41238/2015 05/01/2016 in WP No.41239/2015 05/01/2016 in WP No. 41240/2015 05/01/2016 in WP No.41241/2015 passed by the High Court Of Karnataka At Bangalore)STATE OF KARNATAKA AND ANR. Petitioner(s) VERSUSB.S. YEDDYURAPPA AND ANR. Respondent(s)(WITH APPLN. (S) FOR PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS AND INTERIM RELIEF AND OFFICE REPORT)Date : 16/08/2016 These petitions were called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE D.Y. CHANDRACHUDFor Petitioner(s) Mr. Joseph Aristotle S.,Adv. Ms. Priya Aristotle, Adv. Mr. Rajesh Kumar Singh, Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. K.V. Vishwanathan, Sr. Adv. Mr. Shubhranshu Padhi, Adv. Mr. Kush Chaturvedi, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E RCounter affidavit be filed within four weeks. List after four weeks. (Ashwani Thakur) (Tapan Kr. Chakraborty ) COURT MASTER COURT MASTER

SECTIONIIB IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION PETITION FOR SPECIAL LEAVE TO APPEAL(CRL.)NOS. 53335347 OF 2016 WITH CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION NO. 1152411538 OF 2016 ( Application for permission to file additional documents ) STATE OF KARNATAKA & ANR. .... PETITIONERS VERSUS B.S. YEDDYURAPPA & ANR. .... RESPONDENTS OFFICE REPORT The matters above mentioned were listed before the Hon'ble Court on 12.07.2016, when the Court was pleased to pass the following Order: “ Delay condoned. Issue notice on Special Leave Petitions as well as on interim relief, returnable within four weeks.” Accordingly, Show Cause Notice returnable on 16.08.2016 was issued to both the respondents through Registered A.D. Post on 22.07.2016. It is submitted that Mr. Shubhranshu Padhi, Advocate has filed Vakalatnama/Appearance on behalf of Respondent No. 1. It is further submitted that neither A.D. Card nor unserved envelope containing notice has been received from Respondent No.2 so far. Service of show cause notice is not complete in respect of Respondent No. 2 . The matters above mentioned are, therefore, listed before the Hon’ble Court with this office report. DATED this the 10th day of August, 2016. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR COPY TO : 1. Mr. Joseph Aristotle S., Advocate 2. Mr. Shubhranshu Padhi, Advocate ASSISTANT REGISTRAR c4

ITEM NO.1 COURT NO.15 SECTION II S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS CRLMP. 161/2015 in Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s). 5838/2014 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 30/04/2014 in SBCRP No. 341/2014 passed by the High Court of Rajasthan at Jaipur) MANJU SURANA Petitioner(s) VERSUS SUNIL ARORA AND ORS Respondent(s) (For deletion of the name of respondent and office report) Date : 08/08/2016 This application was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA [IN CHAMBERS] For Petitioner(s) Mr. Prashant Bhushan,Adv. Mr. Rohit Kumar Singh,Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Gautam Jha,Adv. Ms. Sweta Jha,Adv. Mr. Merusagar Samantaray,Adv. Mr. Nachiketa Joshi,Adv. Mr. Nishant Ramakantrao Katneshwarkar,Adv. Mr. Rajeev Sharma,Adv. Mr. Vikas Singh,Sr. Adv. Mr. Satya Mitra Garg,Adv. Mr. Ankit Sharma,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R List the matter before the Court. (SAPNA BISHT) SR.P.A. (SHARDA KAPOOR) COURT MASTER

ITEM NO.1 COURT NO.15 SECTION II S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSCRLMP. 161/2015 in Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.)No(s). 5838/2014(Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 30/04/2014in SBCRP No. 341/2014 passed by the High Court of Rajasthan atJaipur)MANJU SURANA Petitioner(s) VERSUSSUNIL ARORA AND ORS Respondent(s)(For deletion of the name of respondent and office report)Date : 08/08/2016 This application was called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA [IN CHAMBERS]For Petitioner(s) Mr. Prashant Bhushan,Adv. Mr. Rohit Kumar Singh,Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Gautam Jha,Adv. Ms. Sweta Jha,Adv. Mr. Merusagar Samantaray,Adv. Mr. Nachiketa Joshi,Adv. Mr. Nishant Ramakantrao Katneshwarkar,Adv. Mr. Rajeev Sharma,Adv. Mr. Vikas Singh,Sr. Adv. Mr. Satya Mitra Garg,Adv. Mr. Ankit Sharma,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E RList the matter before the Court.(SAPNA BISHT)SR.P.A. (SHARDA KAPOOR)COURT MASTER

ITEM NO.24 REGISTRAR COURT. 1 SECTION II S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE REGISTRAR MR. CHIRAG BHANU SINGH Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s). 5838/2014 MANJU SURANA Petitioner(s) VERSUS SUNIL ARORA AND ORS Respondent(s) (with appln. (s) for deletion of the name of respondent and office report) Date : 21/07/2016 This petition was called on for hearing today. For Petitioner(s) Mr. Adil S., Adv. Mr. Prashant Bhushan,Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Gautam Jha,Adv. Mr. Merusagar Samantaray,Adv. Mr. Nachiketa Joshi,Adv. Mr. Nishant Ramakantrao Katneshwarkar,Adv. Ms. Radha Lakshmi R., Adv. Mr. Shahil Bhalaik, Adv. Mr. Rajeev Sharma,Adv. Mr. Anchit Sharma, Adv. Mr. Satya Mitra Garg,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Service of notice on the application for deletion of respondent No.1 is complete. Despite last opportunity having been granted, respondent Nos.2, 3, 5, 6 and 8 have not filed counter affidavit. Registry to process the application for deletion of respondent No.1 for listing before the Hon'ble Judge in Chambers. (CHIRAG BHANU SINGH) Registrar

SECTION II MATTER FOR : 21.7.2016 R.COURT NO. 01 ITEM NO. 24 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION PETITION FOR SPECIAL LEAVE TO APPEAL(CRIMINAL) NO.5838 OF 2014 WITH CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION NO. 161 OF 2015 (Application for deletion of the name of respondent No.1) Manju Surana ...Petitioner VERSUS Sunil Arora and Ors ...Respondents OFFICE REPORT The matter abovementioned was listed before the Ld. Registrar Court on 09.05.2016, when the following Order was passed: “ Four weeks time as last opportunity, is granted to respondent Nos. 2,3,5,6, and 8 for filing counter affidavit. None appears for Respondent No. 7 despite due service. Defects in the counter affidavit filed by the petitioner to the application for deletion of respondent No. 1 be cured within two weeks' time. Registry to process thereafter, as per rules. List again on 21.7.2016.” It is submitted that Mr. Satya Mitra Garg, Advocate has on 29.03.2016 filed Vakalatnama on behalf of respondent No. 1 after obtaining NOC from erstwhile Advocate Mr.Sanjay Jain. It is further submitted that Counsel for the Respondent No. 1,2,3,5,6 and 8 has not filed counter affidavit on their behalf so far. It is submitted that Mr. Prashant Bhushan,Advocate has filed counter affidavit to the application for deletion filed by respondent No. 1 and the same was defective for not serving the copy to the counsel for the Respondent Nos.3,6 and 8. Counsel for the Petitioner has been intimated vide this Registry's letter dated 10.09.2015. Defects are not cured so far.

It is further submitted that Mr. Satya Mitra Garg, Advocate has cured the defects after serving copy of rejoinder affidavit to the counter affidavit to the application for deletion to the Advocates of the Petition.. It is further submitted that show cause notice in respect of directions of Hon'ble Court's order dated 13.07.2015 in Crl.M.P. No. 161/2015 (Application for deletion of respondent No.1) was issued to all the parties on 07.04.2016 and neither A.D.Card nor unserved cover containing show cause notice has been received back in respect of all the respondents so far. Service of show cause notice is incomplete on all the respondents in the application for deletion of respondent No. 1 in the matter abovementioned. However service of show cause notice issued in the main matter pursuant to this Hon'ble Court's Order dated 11.08.2014 is complete on respondents. The matter abovementioned are listed before the Ld.Registrar Court with this office report. DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF July, 2016. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR Copy to : Mr. Prashant Bhushan,Advocate Mr. Rajeev Sharma,Advocate Mr. Gautam Jha,Advocate Mr. Nachiketa Joshi,Advocate Mr. Satya Mitra Garg, Advocate Mr. Merusagar Samantaray,Advocate Mr. Nishant R.Katneshwarkar, Advocate ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

Mr. Merusagar Samantaray,Advocate Mr. Nishant R.Katneshwarkar, Advocate ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

\206 ITEM NO.24 REGISTRAR COURT. 1 SECTION II S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE REGISTRAR MR. CHIRAG BHANU SINGH Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s). 5838/2014 MANJU SURANA Petitioner(s) VERSUS SUNIL ARORA AND ORS Respondent(s) (with appln. (s) for deletion of the name of respondent and office report) Date : 21/07/2016 This petition was called on for hearing today. For Petitioner(s) Mr. Adil S., Adv. Mr. Prashant Bhushan,Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Gautam Jha,Adv. Mr. Merusagar Samantaray,Adv. Mr. Nachiketa Joshi,Adv. Mr. Nishant Ramakantrao Katneshwarkar,Adv. Ms. Radha Lakshmi R., Adv. Mr. Shahil Bhalaik, Adv. Mr. Rajeev Sharma,Adv. Mr. Anchit Sharma, Adv. Mr. Satya Mitra Garg,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Service of notice on the application for deletion of respondent No.1 is complete. Despite last opportunity having been granted, respondent Nos.2, 3, 5, 6 and 8 have not filed counter affidavit. Registry to process the application for deletion ofSignature Not Verified respondentDigitally signed bySONALI SAUNDDate: 2016.07.22 No.1 for listing before the Hon'ble Judge in16:58:20 ISTReason: Chambers. (CHIRAG BHANU SINGH) Registrar

ITEM NO.19 COURT NO.12 SECTION IIB 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.)...... CRLMP No(s). 8470-8484/2016 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 05/01/2016 in WP No. 26395/2015, WP No. 26396/2015, WP No. 26397/2015,WP No. 41231/2015,WP No. 41232/2015,WP No. 41234/2015,WP No. 41235/2015,WP No. 41237/2015,WP No. 41238/2015,WP No. 41239/2015,WP No. 41240/2015,WP No. 41241/2015,WP No. 41228/2015,WP No. 41229/2015 & WP No. 41230/2015 passed by the High Court Of Karnataka At Bangalore) STATE OF KARNATAKA AND ANR. Petitioner(s) VERSUS B.S. YEDDYURAPPA AND ANR. Respondent(s) CRLMP. 8470-8484/2016(with appln for c/delay in filing SLP and office report) Date : 12/07/2016 These petitions were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA For Petitioner(s) Mr. Vikas Singh,Sr. Adv. Mr. Joseph Aristotle S. Adv. Ms. Priya Aristotle, Adv. Ms. Deepika Kalia, Adv. Mr. Kapish Seth, Adv. For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Delay condoned. Issue notice on Special Leave Petitions as well as on interim relief, returnable within four weeks. (Ashwani Thakur) (Tapan Kr. Chakraborty ) COURT MASTER COURT MASTER

\204 ITEM NO.19 COURT NO.12 SECTION IIB 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.)...... CRLMP No(s). 8470-8484/2016 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 05/01/2016 in WP No. 26395/2015, WP No. 26396/2015, WP No. 26397/2015,WP No. 41231/2015,WP No. 41232/2015,WP No. 41234/2015,WP No. 41235/2015,WP No. 41237/2015,WP No. 41238/2015,WP No. 41239/2015,WP No. 41240/2015,WP No. 41241/2015,WP No. 41228/2015,WP No. 41229/2015 & WP No. 41230/2015 passed by the High Court Of Karnataka At Bangalore) STATE OF KARNATAKA AND ANR. Petitioner(s) VERSUS B.S. YEDDYURAPPA AND ANR. Respondent(s) CRLMP. 8470-8484/2016(with appln for c/delay in filing SLP and office report) Date : 12/07/2016 These petitions were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA For Petitioner(s) Mr. Vikas Singh,Sr. Adv. Mr. Joseph Aristotle S. Adv. Ms. Priya Aristotle, Adv. Ms. Deepika Kalia, Adv. Mr. Kapish Seth, Adv. For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Delay condoned. Issue notice on Special Leave Petitions as well as on interimSignature Not Verified relief, returnable within four weeks.Digitally signed byASHWANI KUMARDate: 2016.07.1316:29:06 ISTReason: (Ashwani Thakur) (Tapan Kr. Chakraborty) COURT MASTER COURT MASTER

ITEM NO.14 COURT NO.12 SECTION IIB 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.)...... CRLMP Nos. 8470-8484/2016 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 05/01/2016 in WP No. 41228/2015, WP No.26395/2015, WP No.26396/2015, WP No. 26397/2015, WP No. 41231/2015, WP No. 41232/2015, WP No.41234/2015, WP No. 41235/2015, WP No. 41237/2015, WP No.41238/2015, WP No. 41239/2015, WP No. 41240/2015, WP No.41241/2015, WP No.41229/2015, and WP No.41230/2015 passed by the High Court Of Karnataka At Bangalore) STATE OF KARNATAKA AND ANR. Petitioner(s) VERSUS B.S. YEDDYURAPPA AND ANR. Respondent(s) (With appln. (s) for c/delay in filing SLP and office report) Date : 12/05/2016 These petitions were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K. AGRAWAL For Petitioner(s) Mr. Vikas Singh, Sr. Adv. Mr. J oseph Aristotle S., Adv. Ms. Priya Aristotle, Adv. Mr. Daniel, Adv. Ms. Deepika Kalia, Adv. Mr. Kapish Seth, Adv. For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R List the petitions on 07 th July, 2016. (Nidhi Ahuja) (Tapan Kr. Chakraborty) Court Master Court Master

SECTION IIB IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION NOS. 84708484 OF 2016 (Application for condonation of delay in filing Special Leave Petition ) IN PETITION FOR SPECIAL LEAVE TO APPEAL (CRL.) NO. OF 2016 THE STATE OF KARNATAKA & ANR. .... PETITIONERS VERSUS SHRI B.S. YEDDYURAPPA & ANR. .... RESPONDENTS OFFICE REPORT The matter above mentioned has been filed by Mr. Joseph Aristotle S., Advocate on behalf of the Petitioners against the final Judgment and Order dated 05.01.2016 of the High Court of Karnataka at Bangalore in Writ Petition No. 41228 of 2015 (GMRES) c/w Writ Petition Nos. 2639526397, 4122941232, 4123441235, 4123741241 of 2015). It is submitted that there is a delay of 16 days in filing the Special Leave Petition and the same is accompanied with application for condonation of delay in filing the Special Leave Petition. It is further submitted that Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No. 9897 of 2015 between same parties arising out of similar issue was listed before Hon'ble Court on 14.12.2015, when the Court was pleased to dispose of the same. A Copy of the Record of proceedings dated 14.12.2015 is enclosed herewith for perusal of Hon'ble Court. It is further submitted that Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No. 1054 of 2015 filed by son of Respondent No. 1 herein challenging the proceedings against him under Prevention of Corruption Act was listed before Hon'ble Court on 09.02.2015, when the Court was pleased to issue notice and Criminal Miscellaneous Petition No. 4225 of 2015 (Application for Stay) in Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No. 1054 of 2015 was listed before Hon'ble Court on 01.04.2015, when the Court was pleased to grant stay and Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No. 1054 of 2015 is still pending for hearing before Hon'ble Court. A Copy of the Record of proceedings dated 09.02.2015 and 01.04.2015 are enclosed herewith for perusal of Hon'ble Court.

It is further submitted that Writ Petition (Crl.) No. 20 of 2015 filed by Son of Respondent No. 1 herein challenging the validity of Section 19 (3) of Prevention of corruption act was listed before Hon'ble Court on 09.02.2015, when the Court was pleased to issue notice and the same is still pending for hearing before the Hon'ble Court. It is further submitted that Counsel for the petitioner has on 09.05.2016 filed Application for permission to file additional documents along with additional documents. Copy of the application is being circulated herewith for perusal of Hon'ble Court. The application for condonation of delay in filing is listed before Hon'ble Court with this office report. Dated this the 10 th day of May, 2016 . ASSISTANT REGISTRAR Copy To: 1. Mr. Joseph Aristotle S., Advocate ASSISTANT REGISTRAR c4

ê ITEM NO.14 COURT NO.12 SECTION IIB 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.)...... CRLMP Nos. 8470-8484/2016 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 05/01/2016 in WP No. 41228/2015, WP No.26395/2015, WP No.26396/2015, WP No. 26397/2015, WP No. 41231/2015, WP No. 41232/2015, WP No.41234/2015, WP No. 41235/2015, WP No. 41237/2015, WP No.41238/2015, WP No. 41239/2015, WP No. 41240/2015, WP No.41241/2015, WP No.41229/2015, and WP No.41230/2015 passed by the High Court Of Karnataka At Bangalore) STATE OF KARNATAKA AND ANR. Petitioner(s) VERSUS B.S. YEDDYURAPPA AND ANR. Respondent(s) (With appln. (s) for c/delay in filing SLP and office report) Date : 12/05/2016 These petitions were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K. AGRAWAL For Petitioner(s) Mr. Vikas Singh, Sr. Adv. Mr. Joseph Aristotle S., Adv. Ms. Priya Aristotle, Adv. Mr. Daniel, Adv. Ms. Deepika Kalia, Adv. Mr. Kapish Seth, Adv. For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R List the petitions on 07th July, 2016. (Nidhi Ahuja) (Tapan Kr. Chakraborty)Signature Not Verified Court Master Court MasterDigitally signed byNIDHI AHUJADate: 2016.05.1716:18:27 ISTReason:

ITEM NO.37 REGISTRAR COURT. 1 SECTION II S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE REGISTRAR MR. PAWAN DEV KOTWAL Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s). 5838/2014 MANJU SURANA Petitioner(s) VERSUS SUNIL ARORA AND ORS Respondent(s) (with appln. (s) for deletion of the name of respondent and office report) Date : 09/05/2016 This petition was called on for hearing today. For Petitioner(s) Mr. Prashant Bhushan,Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Gautam Jha,Adv. Ms. Viddushi, Adv. Mr. Merusagar Samantaray,Adv. Mr. Nachiketa Joshi,Adv. Mr. Vilas Giri, Adv. Mr. Nishant Ramakantrao Katneshwarkar,Adv. Mr. Rajeev Sharma,Adv. Mr. Anchit Sharma, Adv. Mr. Satya Mitra Garg,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Four weeks' time, as last opportunity, is granted to respondent Nos.2, 3, 5, 6 and 8 for filing counter affidavit. None appears for respondent No.7, despite due service. Defects in the counter affidavit filed by the petitioner to the application for deletion of respondent No.1 be cured within two weeks' time. Registry to process thereafter, as per rules. List again on 21.7.2016. (PAWAN DEV KOTWAL) Registrar

\214 ITEM NO.37 REGISTRAR COURT. 1 SECTION II S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE REGISTRAR MR. PAWAN DEV KOTWAL Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s). 5838/2014 MANJU SURANA Petitioner(s) VERSUS SUNIL ARORA AND ORS Respondent(s) (with appln. (s) for deletion of the name of respondent and office report) Date : 09/05/2016 This petition was called on for hearing today. For Petitioner(s) Mr. Prashant Bhushan,Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Gautam Jha,Adv. Ms. Viddushi, Adv. Mr. Merusagar Samantaray,Adv. Mr. Nachiketa Joshi,Adv. Mr. Vilas Giri, Adv. Mr. Nishant Ramakantrao Katneshwarkar,Adv. Mr. Rajeev Sharma,Adv. Mr. Anchit Sharma, Adv. Mr. Satya Mitra Garg,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Four weeks' time, as last opportunity, is granted to respondent Nos.2, 3, 5, 6 and 8 for filing counter affidavit. None appears for respondent No.7, despite due service. Defects in the counter affidavit filed by the petitioner to the application for deletion of respondent No.1 be cured within two weeks' time. Registry to process thereafter, as per rules.Signature Not VerifiedDigitally signed byHema JoshiDate: 2016.05.1111:15:17 IST List again on 21.7.2016.Reason: (PAWAN DEV KOTWAL) Registrar

ITEM NO.28 REGISTRAR COURT. 1 SECTION II S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE REGISTRAR MR. PAWAN DEV KOTWAL Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s). 1092/2015 AMBUJ KUMAR SHARMA Petitioner(s) VERSUS AJAY KUMAR GEHLOT AND ANR. Respondent(s) (with office report) Date : 05/04/2016 This petition was called on for hearing today. For Petitioner(s) Mr Omanakuttan K.K., Adv. Mr. Prashant Bhushan,Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Milind Kumar,Adv. Rishi Matoliya,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Respondent no.1 has not filed counter affidavit despite last opportunity granted. Further opportunity is declined. Respondent no.2 has already filed counter affidavit. Registry to process the matter for being listed before the Hon'ble Court as per rules. (PAWAN DEV KOTWAL) Registrar

SECTION II MATTER FOR : 05.04.2016 R.COURT NO. : 01 ITEM NO. : 28 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION PETITION FOR SPECIAL LEAVE TO APPEAL(CRIMINAL) NO.1092 OF 2015 Ambuj Kumar Sharma ...Petitioner VERSUS Ajay Kumar Gehlot and Anr ...Respondents OFFICE REPORT The matter abovementioned was listed before the Ld. Registar Court on 09.02.2016, when the following Order was passed: “Four weeks' time, as last opportunity, is granted to Respondent No.1 for filing counter affidavit. Respondent no. 2 has already filed the counter affidavit List again on 05.04.2016.” It is submitted that Mr. Rishi Matoliya,Advocate for the Respondent No.1 has not filed counter affidavit so far. Service of show cause of notice is complete on both the Respondents. The matter abovementioned is listed before the Ld.Registrar Court with this office report. DATED THIS THE 01st DAY OF April, 2016. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR Copy to :1) Mr Prashant Bhushan, Adv 2) Mr Milind Kumar,Adv 3) Mr.Rishi Matoliya,Adv ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

SECTION II MATTER FOR : 09.02.2016 R.COURT NO. : 01 ITEM NO. : 43 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION PETITION FOR SPECIAL LEAVE TO APPEAL(CRIMINAL) NO.1092 OF 2015 Ambuj Kumar Sharma ...Petitioner VERSUS Ajay Kumar Gehlot and Anr ...Respondents OFFICE REPORT The matter abovementioned was listed before the Ld. Registar Court on 23rd November, 2015, when the following Order was passed: “Respondent No.1 has yet to file counter affidavit. Be filed within four weeks time. Counter affidavit of respondent no. 2 is already on record. List again on 9.2.2016.” It is submitted that Mr. Rishi Matoliya,Advocate for the Respondent No.1 has not filed counter affidavit so far. Service of show cause of notice is complete on both the Respondents. The matter abovementioned is listed before the Ld.Registrar Court with this office report. DATED THIS THE 05 th DAY OF February, 2016. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR Copy to :1) Mr Prashant Bhushan, Adv 2) Mr Milind Kumar,Adv 3) Mr.Rishi Matoliya,Adv ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

SECTION II MATTER FOR : 04.09.2015 R.COURT NO. : 01 ITEM NO. : 62 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION PETITION FOR SPECIAL LEAVE TO APPEAL(CRIMINAL) NO.1092 OF 2015 Ambuj Kumar Sharma ...Petitioner VERSUS Ajay Kumar Gehlot and Anr ...Respondents OFFICE REPORT The matter above-mentioned was listed before the Ld. Registar Court on 21st July, 2015, when the following Order was passed: “Respondent Nos.1 and 2 to file counter affidavit within four weeks. List again on 4.9.2015.” It is submitted that counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 and 2 has not filed counter affidavit so far. Service is complete on both the Respondents. The matter abovementioned is listed before the Ld.Registrar Court with this office report. DATED THIS THE 03rd DAY OF September, 2015. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR Copy to :1) Mr Prashant Bhushan, Adv 2) Mr Milind Kumar,Adv 3) Mr.Rishi Matoliya ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

ITEM NO.23 REGISTRAR COURT. 1 SECTION II S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE REGISTRAR MR. PAWAN DEV KOTWAL Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s). 5838/2014 MANJU SURANA Petitioner(s) VERSUS SUNIL ARORA AND ORS Respondent(s) (With appln. (s) for deletion of the name of respondent and office report) WITH SLP(Crl) No. 1092/2015 (With Office Report) Date : 29/02/2016 This petition was called on for hearing today. For Petitioner(s) Mr. Rohit Kumar Singh, Adv. Mr. Prashant Bhushan,Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Siddhartha Jha, Adv. Mr. Gautam Jha,Adv. Mr. Merusagar Samantaray,Adv. Mr. Nachiketa Joshi,Adv. Mr. Nishant Ramakantrao Katneshwarkar,Adv. Mr. Rajeev Sharma,Adv. Mr. Sunil Satyarthi, Adv. Mr. Sanjay Jain,Adv. Mr. H.D. Thanvi, Adv. Mr. Rishi Matoliya, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Four weeks time is granted to the learned Counsel for Respondent Nos. 1,2,3,5,6, and 8 to file the counter affidavit. None appears for Respondent No. 7 despite due service. The time granted as last opportunity for filing counter affidavit to the Respondent No. 1 has not expired as per order dated 09.02.2016 of this Court. As such he is at liberty to file the same within the granted time period. ...contd. 2/-

-2- Respondent No. 2 has already filed the counter affidavit. Four weeks time is granted to the learned Counsel for Respondent No. 3 to file the counter affidavit. List again on 09.05.2016. (PAWAN DEV KOTWAL) Registrar

° ITEM NO.23 REGISTRAR COURT. 1 SECTION II S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE REGISTRAR MR. PAWAN DEV KOTWAL Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s). 5838/2014 MANJU SURANA Petitioner(s) VERSUS SUNIL ARORA AND ORS Respondent(s) (With appln. (s) for deletion of the name of respondent and office report) WITH SLP(Crl) No. 1092/2015 (With Office Report) Date : 29/02/2016 This petition was called on for hearing today. For Petitioner(s) Mr. Rohit Kumar Singh, Adv. Mr. Prashant Bhushan,Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Siddhartha Jha, Adv. Mr. Gautam Jha,Adv. Mr. Merusagar Samantaray,Adv. Mr. Nachiketa Joshi,Adv. Mr. Nishant Ramakantrao Katneshwarkar,Adv. Mr. Rajeev Sharma,Adv. Mr. Sunil Satyarthi, Adv. Mr. Sanjay Jain,Adv. Mr. H.D. Thanvi, Adv. Mr. Rishi Matoliya, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Four weeks time is granted to the learned Counsel for Respondent Nos. 1,2,3,5,6, and 8 to file the counter affidavit. None appears for Respondent No. 7 despite due service. The time granted as last opportunity for filing counter affidavit to the Respondent No. 1 has not expired as per order dated 09.02.2016 of this Court. As such he is at liberty to file the same within the granted time period.Signature Not VerifiedDigitally signed byRupam DhamijaDate: 2016.03.0117:04:13 ISTReason: ...contd. 2/- -2- Respondent No. 2 has already filed the counter affidavit. Four weeks time is granted to the learned Counsel forRespondent No. 3 to file the counter affidavit. List again on 09.05.2016.

(PAWAN DEV KOTWAL) Registrar

ITEM NO.43 REGISTRAR COURT. 1 SECTION II S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE REGISTRAR MR. PAWAN DEV KOTWAL Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s). 1092/2015 AMBUJ KUMAR SHARMA Petitioner(s) VERSUS AJAY KUMAR GEHLOT AND ANR. Respondent(s) (with office report) Date : 09/02/2016 This petition was called on for hearing today. For Petitioner(s) Mr. Govind Jee, Adv. Mr. Prashant Bhushan,Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Milind Kumar,Adv. Mr. H.D. Thanvi, Adv. Mr. Rishi Matoliya,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Four weeks' time, as last opportunity, is granted to respondent No.1 for filing counter affidavit. Respondent No.2 has already filed the counter affidavit. List again on 5.4.2016. (PAWAN DEV KOTWAL) Registrar

ºITEM NO.43 REGISTRAR COURT. 1 SECTION II S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE REGISTRAR MR. PAWAN DEV KOTWALPetition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s). 1092/2015AMBUJ KUMAR SHARMA Petitioner(s) VERSUSAJAY KUMAR GEHLOT AND ANR. Respondent(s)(with office report)Date : 09/02/2016 This petition was called on for hearing today.For Petitioner(s) Mr. Govind Jee, Adv. Mr. Prashant Bhushan,Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Milind Kumar,Adv. Mr. H.D. Thanvi, Adv. Mr. Rishi Matoliya,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E RFour weeks' time, as last opportunity, is granted torespondent No.1 for filing counter affidavit.Respondent No.2 has already filed the counter affidavit.List again on 5.4.2016. (PAWAN DEV KOTWAL) Registrar

ITEM NO.50 REGISTRAR COURT. 1 SECTION II S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE REGISTRAR MRS. RACHNA GUPTA Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s). 1092/2015 AMBUJ KUMAR SHARMA Petitioner(s) VERSUS AJAY KUMAR GEHLOT AND ANR. Respondent(s) (with office report) Date : 23/11/2015 This petition was called on for hearing today. For Petitioner(s) Mr Syed Musaib, Adv. Mr. Prashant Bhushan,Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Milind Kumar,Adv. Rishi Matoliya,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Respondent no.1 has yet to file counter affidavit. Be filed within four weeks time. Counter affidavit of respondent no.2 is already on record. List again on 9.2.2016. (RACHNA GUPTA) Registrar

¼ ITEM NO.50 REGISTRAR COURT. 1 SECTION II S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE REGISTRAR MRS. RACHNA GUPTA Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s). 1092/2015 AMBUJ KUMAR SHARMA Petitioner(s) VERSUS AJAY KUMAR GEHLOT AND ANR. Respondent(s) (with office report) Date : 23/11/2015 This petition was called on for hearing today. For Petitioner(s) Mr Syed Musaib, Adv. Mr. Prashant Bhushan,Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Milind Kumar,Adv. Rishi Matoliya,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Respondent no.1 has yet to file counter affidavit. Be filed within four weeks time. Counter affidavit of respondent no.2 is already on record. List again on 9.2.2016.Signature Not VerifiedDigitally signed byHema JoshiDate: 2015.11.2410:32:30 ISTReason: (RACHNA GUPTA) Registrar

ITEM NO.62 REGISTRAR COURT. 1 SECTION II S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE REGISTRAR MRS. RACHNA GUPTA Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s). 1092/2015 AMBUJ KUMAR SHARMA Petitioner(s) VERSUS AJAY KUMAR GEHLOT AND ANR. Respondent(s) (with office report) Date : 04/09/2015 This petition was called on for hearing today. For Petitioner(s) Mr Syed Musaib, Adv. Mr. Prashant Bhushan,Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Milind Kumar,Adv. Mr Balkishan Ladhania, Adv. Mr. Rishi Matoliya,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R None of the two respondents have yet filed counter affidavit. Be filed within four weeks time. List again on 23.11.2015. (RACHNA GUPTA) Registrar

SECTION II MATTER FOR : 04.09.2015 R.COURT NO. : 01 ITEM NO. : 62 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION PETITION FOR SPECIAL LEAVE TO APPEAL(CRIMINAL) NO.1092 OF 2015 Ambuj Kumar Sharma ...Petitioner VERSUS Ajay Kumar Gehlot and Anr ...Respondents OFFICE REPORT The matter above-mentioned was listed before the Ld. Registar Court on 21st July, 2015, when the following Order was passed: “Respondent Nos.1 and 2 to file counter affidavit within four weeks. List again on 4.9.2015.” It is submitted that counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 and 2 has not filed counter affidavit so far. Service is complete on both the Respondents. The matter above-mentioned is listed before the Ld.Registrar Court with this office report. DATED THIS THE 03rd DAY OF September, 2015. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR Copy to :1) Mr Prashant Bhushan, Adv 2) Mr Milind Kumar,Adv 3) Mr.Rishi Matoliya ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

ITEM NO.62 REGISTRAR COURT. 1 SECTION II S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE REGISTRAR MRS. RACHNA GUPTA Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s). 1092/2015 AMBUJ KUMAR SHARMA Petitioner(s) VERSUS AJAY KUMAR GEHLOT AND ANR. Respondent(s) (with office report) Date : 04/09/2015 This petition was called on for hearing today. For Petitioner(s) Mr Syed Musaib, Adv. Mr. Prashant Bhushan,Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Milind Kumar,Adv. Mr Balkishan Ladhania, Adv. Mr.Rishi Matoliya,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R None of the two respondents have yet filed counter affidavit. Be filed within four weeks time. List again on 23.11.2015. (RACHNA GUPTA)Signature Not Verified RegistrarDigitally signed byHema JoshiDate: 2015.09.0810:45:32 ISTReason:

ITEM NO.81 REGISTRAR COURT. 1 SECTION II S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE REGISTRAR MRS. RACHNA GUPTA Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s). 1092/2015 AMBUJ KUMAR SHARMA Petitioner(s) VERSUS AJAY KUMAR GEHLOT AND ANR. Respondent(s) (with office report) Date : 21/07/2015 This petition was called on for hearing today. For Petitioner(s) Mr. Harsh Vardhan, Adv. Mr. Prashant Bhushan,Adv. For Respondent(s) Ms. Anjali Chauhan, Adv. Mr. Milind Kumar,Adv. Mr. H.D. Thanvi, Adv. Mr. Rishi Matoliya,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Respondent Nos.1 and 2 to file counter affidavit within four weeks. List again on 4.9.2015. (RACHNA GUPTA) Registrar

Ú ITEM NO.81 REGISTRAR COURT. 1 SECTION II S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE REGISTRAR MRS. RACHNA GUPTA Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s). 1092/2015 AMBUJ KUMAR SHARMA Petitioner(s) VERSUS AJAY KUMAR GEHLOT AND ANR. Respondent(s) (with office report) Date : 21/07/2015 This petition was called on for hearing today. For Petitioner(s) Mr. Harsh Vardhan, Adv. Mr. Prashant Bhushan,Adv. For Respondent(s) Ms. Anjali Chauhan, Adv. Mr. Milind Kumar,Adv. Mr. H.D. Thanvi, Adv. Mr. Rishi Matoliya,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Respondent Nos.1 and 2 to file counter affidavit within four weeks. List again on 4.9.2015. (RACHNA GUPTA) RegistrarSignature Not VerifiedDigitally signed byRupam DhamijaDate: 2015.07.2417:54:40 ISTReason:

ITEM NO.28 COURT NO.3 SECTION II S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS CRLMP. 161/2015 in Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s). 5838/2014 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 30/04/2014 in SBCRP No. 341/2014 passed by the High Court of Rajasthan at Jaipur) MANJU SURANA Petitioner(s) VERSUS SUNIL ARORA AND ORS Respondent(s) (for deletion of the name of respondent and office report) Date : 13/07/2015 This Crl. M. P. was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KURIAN JOSEPH [IN CHAMBERS] For Petitioner(s) Mr. Prashant Bhushan,Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Vikas Singh,Sr. Adv. Mr. Sunil Satyarthi,Adv. Mrs. Deepika Kana,Adv. Mr. Kapish Seth,Adv. Mr. Sanjay Jain,Adv. Mr. Gautam Jha,Adv. Mr. Merusagar Samantaray,Adv. Mr. Nachiketa Joshi,Adv. Mr. Nishant Ramakantrao Katneshwarkar,Adv. Mr. Rajeev Sharma,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Issue notice on Crl.M.P. No.161/2015 returnable in four weeks . (RASHI GUPTA) (PARDEEP KUMAR) Sr. P.A. AR-cum-PS

h ITEM NO.28 COURT NO.3 SECTION II S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS CRLMP. 161/2015 in Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s). 5838/2014 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 30/04/2014 in SBCRP No. 341/2014 passed by the High Court of Rajasthan at Jaipur) MANJU SURANA Petitioner(s) VERSUS SUNIL ARORA AND ORS Respondent(s) (for deletion of the name of respondent and office report) Date : 13/07/2015 This Crl. M. P. was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KURIAN JOSEPH [IN CHAMBERS] For Petitioner(s) Mr. Prashant Bhushan,Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Vikas Singh,Sr. Adv. Mr. Sunil Satyarthi,Adv. Mrs. Deepika Kana,Adv. Mr. Kapish Seth,Adv. Mr. Sanjay Jain,Adv. Mr. Gautam Jha,Adv. Mr. Merusagar Samantaray,Adv. Mr. Nachiketa Joshi,Adv. Mr. Nishant Ramakantrao Katneshwarkar,Adv. Mr. Rajeev Sharma,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Issue notice on Crl.M.P. No.161/2015 returnableSignature Not Verified in four weeks.Digitally signed byPardeep KumarDate: 2015.07.1515:57:53 ISTReason: (RASHI GUPTA) (PARDEEP KUMAR) Sr. P.A. AR-cum-PS

ITEM NO.10 COURT NO.15 SECTION II S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS CRLMP. 161/2015 in Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s). 5838/2014 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 30/04/2014 in SBCRP No. 341/2014 passed by the High Court Of Rajasthan At Jaipur) MANJU SURANA Petitioner(s) VERSUS SUNIL ARORA AND ORS Respondent(s) (for deletion of the name of respondent and office report) Date : 12/05/2015 This application was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAFULLA C. PANT [IN CHAMBER] For Petitioner(s) Mr. Prashant Bhushan,Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Gautam Jha,Adv. Mr. Merusagar Samantaray,Adv. Mr. Nachiketa Joshi,Adv. Mr. Nishant Ramakantrao Katneshwarkar,Adv. Mr. Rajeev Sharma,Adv. Mr. Sanjay Jain,Adv. Mr. Sunil S., Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R At the request of Mr. Sanjay Jain, learned counsel for the applicant, list the CrlMP after six weeks. (DEEPAK MANSUKHANI) (PARDEEP KUMAR) COURT MASTER AR-cum-PS

SECTION-II IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION NO. 161 OF 2015 (Application for deletion of name of Respondent No.1 from array of parties ) IN PETITION FOR SPECIAL LEAVE TO APPEAL(CRL.) NO. 5838 OF 2014 Manju Surana ...Petitioner(s) VERSUS Sunil Arora & Ors. ... Respondent(s) OFFICE REPORT It is submitted that an application for deletion of name of Respondent No.1 from array of parties (Crl. Misc. Petition No. 161 of 2015) was listed before the Hon'ble Judge in Chambers on 19 th January, 2015 when His Lordship was pleased to pass the following order : “The application seeking deletion of the respondent no.1 from the array of parties is rejected. Issue notice.” Accordingly Show Cause Notice was issued through Counsel for the Petitioner on 13 th February, 2015 and matter was listed before the Court of Registrar on 9 th March, 2015 when the following order was passe : “The ld. Counsel for respondent no.1, Mr Sanjay Jain is present. It is mentioned that vakalatnama has already been filed way back. However, his name is not been reflected in the cause list. Registry to update the database immediately. The ld counsel has requested some time to take fresh requisite steps after the deletion application has been rejected by the Hon'ble Judge in Chambers in his absence. Service of respondent Nos. 2 and 5 to 7 is complete but none has entered appearance. Counter affidavit of respondent Nos. 3 and 8 is still awaited. Be filed within four weeks. ” Cont....2/-

:2: SLP (Crl.)No. 5838/2014 It is submitted that Mr. Sanjay Jain, Advocate for Respondent No.1 has on 9 th March, 2015 filed an application for restoration of Crl.M.P.No.161 of 2015 pertaining to the application for deletion of name of Respondent No.1 from array of parties. The said application was registered as Crl.M.P.NO. 4749 of 2015 and listed before the Hon'ble Judge in Chambers on 13 th April, 2015 when His Lordship was pleased to pass the following order : “Crl. M.P. No. 4749/2015 seeking restoration of Crl. M.P. No. 161/2015 to its original number is allowed. List Crl. M.P. No. 161/2015 before the Hon'ble Judge-in-chambers.” The application for deletion of name of Respondent No.1 from array of parties in the matter above mentioned is listed before the Hon'ble Judge in Chambers with this office report. DATED this the 29th day of April, 2015. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR COPY TO: Mr. Prashant Bhushan, Advocate 301, New Lawyer's Chambers, S.C.I., N.D. Mr. Gautam Jha, Advocate 229, New Lawyer's Chambers, S.C.I., N.D. Mr. Rajeev Sharma, Advocate 229, New Lawyer's Chambers, S.C.I., N.D. Mr. Sanjay Jain, Advocate 95, Lawyer's Chambers, S.C.I., N.D. C4/dk ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

ITEM NO.50 REGISTRAR COURT. 1 SECTION II S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE REGISTRAR MRS. RACHNA GUPTA Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s). 1092/2015 AMBUJ KUMAR SHARMA Petitioner(s) VERSUS AJAY KUMAR GEHLOT AND ANR. Respondent(s) Date : 22/04/2015 This petition was called on for hearing today. For Petitioner(s) Mr. Rohit Kr. Singh, Adv. Mr. Prashant Bhushan,Adv. For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Service of both the respondents is still awaited. List again on 21.7.2015. (RACHNA GUPTA) Registrar

: ITEM NO.50 REGISTRAR COURT. 1 SECTION II S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE REGISTRAR MRS. RACHNA GUPTA Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s). 1092/2015 AMBUJ KUMAR SHARMA Petitioner(s) VERSUS AJAY KUMAR GEHLOT AND ANR. Respondent(s) Date : 22/04/2015 This petition was called on for hearing today. For Petitioner(s) Mr. Rohit Kr. Singh, Adv. Mr. Prashant Bhushan,Adv. For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Service of both the respondents is still awaited. List again on 21.7.2015. (RACHNA GUPTA) RegistrarSignature Not VerifiedDigitally signed byRupam DhamijaDate: 2015.04.2811:09:25 ISTReason:

ITEM NO.23 COURT NO.3 SECTION II S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS CRLMP. 4749/2015 in Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s). 5838/2014 (Arising out of final order dated 30/04/2014 in SBCRP No. 341/2014 passed by the High Court of Rajasthan at Jaipur) MANJU SURANA Petitioner(s) VERSUS SUNIL ARORA AND ORS Respondent(s) (For restoration and office report) Date : 13/04/2015 This application was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KURIAN JOSEPH [IN CHAMBER] For Petitioner(s) Mr. Prashant Bhushan,Adv. Mr. Rohit Kumar Singh, Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Vikas Singh, Sr. Adv. Mr. Sanjay Jain, Adv. Mr. Sunil Satyarthi, Adv. Mr. Gautam Jha,Adv. Mr. Merusagar Samantaray,Adv. Mr. Nachiketa Joshi,Adv. Mr. Nishant Ramakantrao Katneshwarkar,Adv. Mr. Rajeev Sharma,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Crl. M.P. No. 4749/2015 seeking restoration of Crl. M.P. No. 161/2015 to its original number is allowed. List Crl. M.P. No. 161/2015 before the Hon'ble Judge-in-chambers. (Jyoti Gupta) (Pradeep Kumar) Sr. PA AR-cum-PS

¾ ITEM NO.23 COURT NO.3 SECTION II S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS CRLMP. 4749/2015 in Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s). 5838/2014 (Arising out of final order dated 30/04/2014 in SBCRP No. 341/2014 passed by the High Court of Rajasthan at Jaipur) MANJU SURANA Petitioner(s) VERSUS SUNIL ARORA AND ORS Respondent(s) (For restoration and office report) Date : 13/04/2015 This application was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KURIAN JOSEPH [IN CHAMBER] For Petitioner(s) Mr. Prashant Bhushan,Adv. Mr. Rohit Kumar Singh, Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Vikas Singh, Sr. Adv. Mr. Sanjay Jain, Adv. Mr. Sunil Satyarthi, Adv. Mr. Gautam Jha,Adv. Mr. Merusagar Samantaray,Adv. Mr. Nachiketa Joshi,Adv. Mr. Nishant Ramakantrao Katneshwarkar,Adv. Mr. Rajeev Sharma,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Crl. M.P. No. 4749/2015 seeking restoration of Crl. M.P. No. 161/2015 to its original number is allowed. List Crl. M.P. No. 161/2015 before the Hon'bleSignature Not VerifiedJudge-in-chambers.Digitally signed bySuman WadhwaDate: 2015.04.1810:53:53 ISTReason: (Jyoti Gupta) (Pradeep Kumar) Sr. PA AR-cum-PS

ITEM NO.67 REGISTRAR COURT. 1 SECTION II S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE REGISTRAR MRS. RACHNA GUPTA Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s). 5838/2014 MANJU SURANA Petitioner(s) VERSUS SUNIL ARORA AND ORS Respondent(s) (with office report) WITH SLP(Crl) No. 1092/2015 (With appln.(s) for stay and Office Report) Date : 09/03/2015 This petition was called on for hearing today. For Petitioner(s) Mr Harshvardhan, Adv. Mr. Prashant Bhushan,Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Gautam Jha,Adv. Mr. Rajeev Sharma,Adv. Mr Sunil Satyarthi, Adv. Mr Sanjay Jain, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R SLP(CRL.) NO.5838/2014 The ld. Counsel for respondent no.1, Mr Sanjay Jain is present. It is mentioned that vakalatnama has already been filed way back. However, his name is not been reflected in the cause list. Registry to update the database immediately.

-2- Item No.67 The ld counsel has requested some time to take fresh requisite steps after the deletion application has been rejected by the Hon'ble Judge in Chambers in his absence. Service of respondent Nos. 2 and 5 to 7 is complete but none has entered appearance. Counter affidavit of respondent Nos. 3 and 8 is still awaited. Be filed within four weeks. SLP(CRL.) NO.1092/2015 Service of both respondents is still awaited. The ld. Counsel has mentioned that an application praying for stay has been filed. Registry to verify and prepare the office report accordingly. List again on 22.4.2015. (RACHNA GUPTA) Registrar

SECTION-II IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION PETITION FOR SPECIAL LEAVE TO APPEAL(CRL.) NO. 5838 OF 2014 Manju Surana ...Petitioner(s) VERSUS Sunil Arora & Ors. ... Respondent(s) AND PETITION FOR SPECIAL LEAVE TO APPEAL(CRL.) NO. 1092 OF 2015 Ambuj Kumar Sharma ...Petitioner(s) VERSUS Ajay Kumar Gehlot & Anr. ... Respondent(s) OFFICE REPORT SLP (Crl.)No. 5838 of 2014 The matter above mentioned was listed before the Hon'ble Court on 11 th August, 2014 when the Court was pleased to pass the following order: “Issue notice returnable in six weeks. Notice will be issued to all the respondents except respondent No. 4 for the time being. Dasti, in addition to the ordinary process, is permitted. ” Accordingly Show Cause Notice returnable on 19 th September, 2014 was issued to all the 8 Respondents except Respondent No.4 by registered post A.D. as well as by dasti through Counsel for the Petitioner on 20 th August, 2014. Mr. Sanjay Jain, Advocate has on 3 rd December, 2014 filed Vakalatnama/Appearance on behalf of Respondent No.1 alongwith application for deletion of name of Respondent No. 1 from the array of parties which is defective as it has not been served on the other side. A.D. cards duly signed have been received back from Respondent Nos. 2 5 & 7, but no one has entered appearance on their behalf, so far. Cont....2/-

:2: SLP (Crl.)No. 5838/2014 Mr. Gautam Jha, Advocate has filed Vakalatnama/Appearance on behalf of Respondent No.3. Mr. Rajeev Sharma, Advocate has filed Vakalatnama/Appearance on behalf of Respondent No.8. It is further submitted that Counsel for the Petitioner has on 5 th September, 2014 filed affidavit alongwith proof of dasti service by serving notice on Respondent Nos. 3, 6 & 8. Service of Show Cause Notice is complete on all the Respondents. The matter above mentioned was listed before the Court of Registrar on 16 th December, 2014 when the following order was passed : “The office report indicates that the learned counsel for the respondent No.1 has filed an application for deletion of the respondent No.1 which is defective. The learned counsel shall cure the defects found in the said application within a period of three weeks. List again on 9.3.2015. ” It is submitted that Counsel for Respondent No.1 has cured the defects and the said application was registered as Criminal Misc. Petition No. 161 of 2015 and listed before the Hon'ble Judge in Chambers on 19 th January, 2015 when His Lordship was pleased to pass the following order : “The application seeking deletion of the respondent no.1 from the array of parties is rejected. Issue notice.” Accordingly Show Cause Notice was issued to Respondent No.1 by registered post A.D. on 13 th February, 2015. Cont....3/-

:3: SLP (Crl.)No. 5838/2014 SLP (Crl.)No. 1092 of 2015 The matter above mentioned was listed before the Hon'ble Court on 13 th February, 2015 when the Court was pleased to pass the following order: “Issue notice. Tag with SLP(Crl.) No. 5838/2014.” Accordingly Show Cause Notice was issued to both the Respondents by registered post A.D. Service of Show Cause Notice is awaited. The matters above mentioned are listed before the Court of Registrar with this office report. DATED this the 27th day of February, 2015. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR COPY TO: Mr. Prashant Bhushan, Advocate 301, New Lawyer's Chambers, S.C.I., N.D. Mr. Gautam Jha, Advocate 229, New Lawyer's Chambers, S.C.I., N.D. Mr. Rajeev Sharma, Advocate 229, New Lawyer's Chambers, S.C.I., N.D. Mr. Sanjay Jain, Advocate 95, Lawyer's Chambers, S.C.I., N.D. C4/dk ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

j ITEM NO.67 REGISTRAR COURT. 1 SECTION II S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE REGISTRAR MRS. RACHNA GUPTA Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s). 5838/2014 MANJU SURANA Petitioner(s) VERSUS SUNIL ARORA AND ORS Respondent(s) (with office report) WITH SLP(Crl) No. 1092/2015 (With appln.(s) for stay and Office Report) Date : 09/03/2015 This petition was called on for hearing today. For Petitioner(s) Mr Harshvardhan, Adv. Mr. Prashant Bhushan,Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Gautam Jha,Adv. Mr. Rajeev Sharma,Adv. Mr Sunil Satyarthi, Adv. Mr Sanjay Jain, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R SLP(CRL.) NO.5838/2014 The ld. Counsel for respondent no.1, Mr Sanjay Jain isSignature Not Verified present. It is mentioned that vakalatnama has already beenDigitally signed byHema JoshiDate: 2015.03.1209:51:43 ISTReason: filed way back. However, his name is not been reflected in the cause list. Registry to update the database immediately. -2-Item No.67The ld counsel has requested some time to take freshrequisite steps after the deletion application has been

rejected by the Hon'ble Judge in Chambers in his absence. Service of respondent Nos. 2 and 5 to 7 is complete butnone has entered appearance. Counter affidavit of respondent Nos. 3 and 8 is stillawaited. Be filed within four weeks.SLP(CRL.) NO.1092/2015 Service of both respondents is still awaited. The ld. Counsel has mentioned that an applicationpraying for stay has been filed. Registry to verify andprepare the office report accordingly. List again on 22.4.2015. (RACHNA GUPTA) Registrar

ITEM NO.16 COURT NO.7 SECTION II 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). 1092/2015 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 12/11/2014 in SBCRM No. 2755/2013 passed by the High Court Of Rajasthan At Jodhpur) AMBUJ KUMAR SHARMA Petitioner(s) VERSUS AJAY KUMAR GEHLOT AND ANR. Respondent(s) (with appln. (s) for exemption from filing O.T. and office report) Date : 13/02/2015 This petition was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J. CHELAMESWAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN For Petitioner(s) Mr. Prashant Bhushan,Adv. For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Issue notice. Tag with SLP(Crl.) No. 5838/2014. (DEEPAK MANSUKHANI) (INDU BALA KAPUR) COURT MASTER COURT MASTER

ITEM NO.23 COURT NO.11 SECTION II S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS CRLMP. 161/2015 in Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s). 5838/2014 MANJU SURANA Petitioner(s) VERSUS SUNIL ARORA AND ORS Respondent(s) (for deletion of the name of respondent and office report) Date : 19/01/2015 This application was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KURIAN JOSEPH [IN CHAMBER] For Petitioner(s) Mr. Prashant Bhushan,Adv. Mr. Rohit Kumar Singh, Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Gautam Jha,Adv. Mr. Rajeev Sharma,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R The application seeking deletion of the respondent no.1 from the array of parties is rejected. Issue notice. (Pooja Sharma) (Veena Lakhina) Sr. P.A. Court Master

Z ITEM NO.23 COURT NO.11 SECTION II S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS CRLMP. 161/2015 in Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s). 5838/2014 MANJU SURANA Petitioner(s) VERSUS SUNIL ARORA AND ORS Respondent(s) (for deletion of the name of respondent and office report) Date : 19/01/2015 This application was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KURIAN JOSEPH [IN CHAMBER] For Petitioner(s) Mr. Prashant Bhushan,Adv. Mr. Rohit Kumar Singh, Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Gautam Jha,Adv. Mr. Rajeev Sharma,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R The application seeking deletion of the respondent no.1 from the array of parties is rejected. Issue notice.Signature Not VerifiedDigitally signed bySanjay KumarDate: 2015.01.2111:39:28 IST (Pooja Sharma) (Veena Lakhina)Reason: Sr. P.A. Court Master

SECTION-II IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION NO. 161 OF 2015 (Application for deletion of name of Respondent No.1 from the array of parties) IN PETITION FOR SPECIAL LEAVE TO APPEAL(CRL.) NO. 5838 OF 2014 Manju Surana ...Petitioner(s) VERSUS Sunil Arora & Ors. ... Respondent(s) OFFICE REPORT The matter above mentioned was listed before the Hon'ble Court on 11 th August, 2014 when the Court was pleased to pass the following order: “Issue notice returnable in six weeks. Notice will be issued to all the respondents except respondent No. 4 for the time being. Dasti, in addition to the ordinary process, is permitted. ” Accordingly Show Cause Notice returnable on 19 th September, 2014 was issued to all the Respondents except Respondent No.4 by registered post A.D. as well as by dasti through Counsel for the Petitioner on 20 th August, 2014. Mr. Sanjay Jain, Advocate has on 3 rd December, 2014 filed Vakalatnama/Appearance on behalf of Respondent No.1 alongwith application for deletion of name of Respondent No. 1 from the array of parties which is defective as it has not been served on the other side. A.D. cards duly signed have been received back from Respondent Nos. 2 5 & 7, but no one has entered appearance on their behalf, so far. Mr. Gautam Jha, Advocate has filed Vakalatnama/Appearance on behalf of Respondent No.3. Cont....2/-

:2: SLP (Crl.)No. 5838/2014 Mr. Rajeev Sharma, Advocate has filed Vakalatnama/Appearance on behalf of Respondent No.8. It is further submitted that Counsel for the Petitioner has on 5 th September, 2014 filed affidavit alongwith proof of dasti service by serving notice on Respondent Nos. 3, 6 & 8. The matter above mentioned was listed before the Court of Registrar on 16 th December, 2014 when the following order was passed : “The office report indicates that the learned counsel for the respondent No.1 has filed an application for deletion of the respondent No.1 which is defective. The learned counsel shall cure the defects found in the said application within a period of three weeks. List again on 9.3.2015.” It is submitted that Counsel for Respondent No.1 has cured the defects and the said application has been registered as Criminal Misc. Petition No. 161 of 2015. The application for deletion of name of Respondent No.1 from the array of parties above mentioned is listed before the Hon'ble Judge in Chambers with this office report. DATED this the 7th day of January, 2015. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR COPY TO: Mr. Prashant Bhushan, Advocate 301, New Lawyer's Chambers, S.C.I., N.D. Mr. Gautam Jha, Advocate 229, New Lawyer's Chambers, S.C.I., N.D. Mr. Rajeev Sharma, Advocate 229, New Lawyer's Chambers, S.C.I., N.D. Mr. Sanjay Jain, Advocate 95, Lawyer's Chambers, S.C.I., N.D. C4/dk ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

ITEM NO.101 REGISTRAR COURT. 2 SECTION II S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE REGISTRAR M K HANJURA Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s). 5838/2014 MANJU SURANA Petitioner(s) VERSUS SUNIL ARORA AND ORS Respondent(s) (With Appln.(s) for exemption from filing O.T and office report) Date : 16/12/2014 This petition was called on for hearing today. For Petitioner(s) Mr. Prashant Bhushan,Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Rajeev Sharma,Adv. Mr. Gautam Jha,Adv. Mr. Sunil Satyarthi,Adv. Mr. Sanjay Jain,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R The office report indicates that the learned counsel for the respondent No.1 has filed an application for deletion of the respondent No.1 which is defective. The learned counsel shall cure the defects found in the said application within a period of three weeks. List again on 9.3.2015. (M K HANJURA) Registrar MG

Ô ITEM NO.101 REGISTRAR COURT. 2 SECTION II S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE REGISTRAR M K HANJURA Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s). 5838/2014 MANJU SURANA Petitioner(s) VERSUS SUNIL ARORA AND ORS Respondent(s) (With Appln.(s) for exemption from filing O.T and office report) Date : 16/12/2014 This petition was called on for hearing today. For Petitioner(s) Mr. Prashant Bhushan,Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Rajeev Sharma,Adv. Mr. Gautam Jha,Adv. Mr. Sunil Satyarthi,Adv. Mr. Sanjay Jain,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R The office report indicates that the learned counsel for the respondent No.1 has filed an application for deletion of the respondent No.1 which is defective. The learned counsel shall cure the defects found in the said application within a period of three weeks. List again on 9.3.2015.Signature Not VerifiedDigitally signed byMadhu GroverDate: 2014.12.1809:47:20 ISTReason: (M K HANJURA) Registrar MG

ITEM NO.801 REGISTRAR COURT. 2 SECTION II S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE REGISTRAR M K HANJURA Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s). 5838/2014 MANJU SURANA Petitioner(s) VERSUS SUNIL ARORA AND ORS Respondent(s) Date : 05/12/2014 This petition was called on for hearing today. For Petitioner(s) Mr.Syed Musaib,adv. Mr. Prashant Bhushan,Adv. For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R The office report indicates that the Ld.counsel for the petitioner has filed an application for the deletion of the respondent No. 1 from the array of parties which is defective. Ld.counsel shall rectify the defects, whatever have been found in the said application within a period of three weeks. The served respondents shall be at liberty to file the counter affidavit within a period of four weeks. List again on 19.02.2015. (M K HANJURA) Registrar SB

2 ITEM NO.801 REGISTRAR COURT. 2 SECTION II S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE REGISTRAR M K HANJURA Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s). 5838/2014 MANJU SURANA Petitioner(s) VERSUS SUNIL ARORA AND ORS Respondent(s) Date : 05/12/2014 This petition was called on for hearing today. For Petitioner(s) Mr.Syed Musaib,adv. Mr. Prashant Bhushan,Adv. For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R The office report indicates that the Ld.counsel for the petitioner has filed an application for the deletion of the respondent No. 1 from the array of parties which is defective. Ld.counsel shall rectify the defects, whatever have been found in the said application within a period of three weeks. The served respondents shall be at liberty to file the counter affidavit within a period of four weeks. List again on 19.02.2015. (M K HANJURA) Registrar SBSignature Not VerifiedDigitally signed bySushma Kumari BajajDate: 2014.12.0810:44:49 ISTReason:

ITEM NO.12 COURT NO.1 SECTION II 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). 5838/2014 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 30/04/2014 in SBCRP No. 341/2014 passed by the High Court Of Rajasthan at Jaipur) MANJU SURANA Petitioner(s) VERSUS SUNIL ARORA AND ORS Respondent(s) (with appln. (s) for exemption from filing O.T. and office report) Date : 19/09/2014 This petition was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KURIAN JOSEPH HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN For Petitioner(s) Mr. Prashant Bhushan,Adv. For Respondent(s) R-1 Mr. Merusagar Smantaray, Adv. R-3 Mr. Gautam Jha, Adv. R-5 Mr. Nishant Katneshwarkar, Adv. R-8 Mr. Rajeev Sharma, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R According to the Office Report, service is incomplete. Advocate-on-record for the petitioner is directed to take fresh steps for service on the unserved respondents, returnable in ten weeks. Dasti , in addition to the ordinary process, is permitted. (PARDEEP KUMAR) AR-cum-PS (RENU DIWAN) COURT MASTER

SECTION-II IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION PETITION FOR SPECIAL LEAVE TO APPEAL(CRL.) NO. 5838 OF 2014 Manju Surana ...Petitioner(s) VERSUS Sunil Arora & Ors. ... Respondent(s) OFFICE REPORT The matter above mentioned was listed before the Hon'ble Court on 11 th August, 2014 when the Court was pleased to pass the following order: “Issue notice returnable in six weeks. Notice will be issued to all the respondents except respondent No. 4 for the time being. Dasti, in addition to the ordinary process, is permitted. ” Accordingly Show Cause Notice returnable on 19 th September, 2014 was issued to all the Respondents except Respondent No.4 by registered post A.D. as well as by dasti through Counsel for the Petitioner on 20 th August, 2014. It is submitted that Mr. Rajeev Sharma, Advocate has on 15 th September, 2014 filed Vakalatnama/Appearance on behalf of Respondent No.8. Service of Show Cause Notice is awaited through usual mode in respect of Respondent Nos. 1 to 3 and 5 to 7. It is further submitted that Counsel for the Petitioner has on 5 th September, 2014 filed affidavit alongwith proof of dasti service by serving notice on Respondent Nos. 3, 6 & 8, but on Respondent Nos.1, 2, 5 & 7 by post, but has not filed receiving of the Respondent Nos. 1, 2, 5 & 7. The matter above mentioned is listed before the Hon'ble Court with this office report. DATED this the 17th day of September, 2014. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR COPY TO: Mr. Prashant Bhushan, Advocate Mr. Rajeev Sharma, Advocate C4/dk ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

Z ITEM NO.20 COURT NO.1 SECTION II 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). 5838/2014 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 30/04/2014 in SBCRP No. 341/2014 passed by the High Court Of Rajasthan, Bench at Jaipur) MANJU SURANA Petitioner(s) VERSUS SUNIL ARORA AND ORS Respondent(s) (with appln. (s) for exemption from filing O.T. and office report) Date : 11/08/2014 This petition was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KURIAN JOSEPH HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN For Petitioner(s) Mr. Prashant Bhushan ,Adv. Mr. Rohit K. Singh, Adv. For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Issue notice returnable in six weeks. Notice will be issued to all the respondents except respondent No. 4 for the time being. Dasti, in addition to the ordinary process, is permitted.Signature Not VerifiedDigitally signed byRajesh DhamDate: 2014.08.1117:28:01 ISTReason: (RAJESH DHAM) (RENU DIWAN) COURT MASTER COURT MASTER