Order 52

Order Details: COPY OF JUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS
Pdf Text: CNR No. DLCT11-000227-2021
CC No.29/2021
FIR No. 14/2010
PS : ACB
State Vs Sandeep Singh & Anr.
11.04.2026
Case taken up today as 03.03.2026 was declared
Holiday, vide Notification No. 64/G-4/Genl.-I/DHC dated
27.02.2026 of Hon’ble Delhi High Court.
Present : Sh. Ravindra Kumar, Ld. Chief PP for State.
Accused Sandeep Singh (A-1) and Awnish Kumar
(A-2) on bail, are present.
Sh. Lakshya Parasher, Sh. Ranjeet Singh and
Ms. Kashish Jain, Ld. Counsels for A-1.
Sh. Rajiv Ranjan, Ld. Counsel for A-2.
PW-26 Sh. Ashok Sehrawat examined in chief,
cross-examined and discharged.
PW IO/Insp. Rajesh Sah is absent despite service.
However, he has sent request telephonically through Naib Court
that due to ill health of her mother, he is not in a position to
appear before the Court today. Considering the said request, he is
personally exempted for today.
An application u/s 311 Cr.P.C. for recalling PW-25
ACP (Retd.) Dr. Rohtash Kumar is moved on behalf of A-1.
Copy thereof supplied to Ld. Chief PP, who has
accepted notice of the application on behalf of State.
Ld. Chief PP for State submits that he does not wish
to file any written reply to the aforesaid application and he shall
straightway advance arguments on it.
Accordingly, arguments on the said application
heard. Record perused.
Contd….
-- 1 of 3 --
- 2 -
It is submitted by Ld. Counsel for applicant/accused
that cross-examination of PW-25 could not be conducted on
behalf of A-1 due to non-availability of his counsel. It is further
submitted that said witness is an essential witness being the IO of
the case from 09.05.2016 to 12.02.2020 and his cross-
examination is bound to reveal the concealed truth. Hence, it is
urged that the application may be allowed and said witness may
be recalled for his cross-examination by A-1.
On the other hand, the application is opposed by Ld.
Chief PP for State on the ground that no justifiable ground
whatsoever is shown or disclosed on behalf of applicant/accused
to recall the aforesaid witness and therefore, the application may
be dismissed.
It is nowhere in dispute that PW-25, being part IO of
the case, is material witness in this matter. As claimed by
applicant/accused, he could not cross-examine the said witness
due to non-availability of his counsel. It is informed to the Court
that counsel for applicant/accused was busy in some personal
work/engagement on that day. That being the position and
keeping in view the fact that applicant/accused should not be
made to suffer due to non-availability of his counsel and the non-
availability of his counsel being on personal ground, the
application in hand deserves to be allowed and accordingly, same
is hereby allowed, however, subject to the condition that the
applicant/accused shall only be granted one effective opportunity
to cross-examine PW-25, which shall be subject to to the
availability of the said witness and also that the applicant/accused
Contd….
-- 2 of 3 --
- 3 -
shall bear the diet money of said witness for the next date. The
application stands disposed off in these terms.
Put up on 03.06.2026 and 05.06.2026 for remaining
PE.
Witnesses mentioned at serial nos. 31 (PW-25) and
32 in the list of prosecution witnesses be summoned for
03.06.2026.
Remaining witnesses, if any, be summoned for
05.06.2026.
Dates are given as per convenience of Ld. Counsels
for accused persons.
(Vidya Prakash)
Special Judge, PC Act (ACB)-01
RACC, New Delhi.
11.04.2026(a)
-- 3 of 3 --