In a bid to expedite proceedings in the Delhi excise policy case under investigation by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), the Delhi High Court issued specific directives on Friday.

Notable political figures such as former Delhi Deputy Chief Minister Manish Sisodia and Bharat Rashtra Samithi (BRS) leader K Kavitha are accused in this case.

The Single-Judge Bench of Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma underscored the urgency of the trial, instructing the trial court to promptly initiate discussions on charges and allocate "block dates" to each accused for arguments on framing charges.Additionally, the Court emphasized the importance of concise proceedings, allowing counsel to file written submissions on the same day arguments are concluded.

"The learned Trial Court is requested that the arguments on charge be heard immediately thereafter keeping in view the above timeline, and block dates be given to each accused for arguments on charge. The counsels who prefer to file written submissions may file it on the same day they conclude arguments. It will now depend on the accused persons as to how much time will they take to address arguments on charge, individually or collectively, for the purpose of speedy trial. The learned Trial Court is requested to ensure short dates are given for the above purpose," the Court directed.

The Court further directed that upon the CBI's submission of its supplementary chargesheet against accused K Kavitha, copies of the same should be promptly provided to the accused on the first day of the hearing to streamline proceedings. Justice Sharma stressed the importance of legible and paginated documents, urging the Investigating Officer (IO) to ensure clarity in the copies provided to the accused.

Highlighting the necessity for expeditious scrutiny of documents by the accused, the Bench emphasized the avoidance of unnecessary delays in the process.

These directions were issued in response to a plea filed by Hyderabad businessman Arun Ramachandran Pillai, one of the accused in the case, challenging the commencement of arguments on framing charges before the completion of the CBI's probe. Pillai contended that any decision on framing charges should be deferred until the CBI concludes its investigation, citing the possibility of additional individuals being implicated.

Despite Pillai's arguments, the Court declined to intervene with the trial court's decision, noting that the trial court had already charged 16 individuals. The Court acknowledged the potential for prolonged proceedings if supplementary chargesheets were filed for additional accused persons. Consequently, the Court upheld the trial court's order, deeming it appropriate given the circumstances.

"This Court is of the opinion that no interference at this stage is required by this Court in the impugned order as the learned Trial Court has already taken note of the grievance of the present petitioner and the said order does not suffer from any infirmity," the Court said.

Cause Title: Arun Ramchandran Pillai v. Central Bureau of Investigation [Neutral Citation: 2024: DHC: 4731]

Appearance:-

Petitioner: Advocates Nitesh Rana, Anuj Tiwari, Kaushal Kait, Deepak Nagar, Nikhil Kohli, Soumya Kumar, Monika

Respondent: Special Public Prosecutor (SPP) DP Singh, Advocates Manu Mishra, Shreya Dutt, Imaan Khera

Click here to read/download the Judgment


Justice Swarana Kanta SharmaDelhi High Court

Sukriti Mishra