Supreme Court - Daily Orders
Vikram Kothari vs Union Of India on 17 January, 2022
Bench: A.M. Khanwilkar, Dinesh Maheshwari, C.T. Ravikumar
1
ITEM NO.17 Court 3 (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
Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s). 8122/2021
(Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 11-01-2021
in MB No. 599/2021 passed by the High Court Of Judicature At
Allahabad, Lucknow Bench)
VIKRAM KOTHARI Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Respondent(s)
(IA No. 137575/2021 - EX-PARTE STAY
IA No. 137246/2021 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED
JUDGMENT
IA No. 137444/2021 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES) Date : 17-01-2022 These matters were called on for hearing today. CORAM :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.M. KHANWILKAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH MAHESHWARI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.T. RAVIKUMAR For parties:
Mr. Maninder Singh, Sr. Advocate Mr. Vikram Chaudhary, Sr. Advocate Mr. Mahesh Agarwal, Advocate Mr. Ankur Sehgal, Advocate Mr. Arshit Anand, Advocate Mr. Pranjal Krishna, Advocate Ms. Ria Khanna, Advocate Mr. Pranav Sehgal, Advocate Mr. Pabhas Bajaj, Advocate Ms. Ashima Chawla, Advocate Mr. E.C. Agarwala, A.O.R Mr. Tushar Mehta, Ld S.G. Mr. K.M.Nataraj, Ld A.S.G. Ms. Sonia Mathur,Adv Signature Not Verified Mr. Rajat Nair, Adv Ms. Deepabali Dutta, Adv Digitally signed by NEETU KHAJURIA Date: 2022.01.18 13:35:17 IST Reason: Mr. Kanu Agrawal, Adv Mr. Navanjay Mahapatra, Adv. Mr. Arvind Kumar Sharma, AOR Mr. Rajesh Kumar Gautam, AOR 2 Mr. Anant Gautam, Adv.
Mr. Nipun Sharma, Adv.
Mr. Ravi Solanki, Adv.
Mr. Vipin Kumar Jai, AOR Mr. Dushyant Parashar, Adv. Mrs. Gurinder Jair, Adv.
Mr. Vipul Jai, Adv.
Mr. G.N. Reddy AOR Mr. Alok Kumar Adv.
Mr. Manan Gambhir Adv.
Mr. Nikhil Malhotra Adv.
Ms. Garima Soni Adv.
Mr. Dushyant Parashar, AOR Mr. Vipin Jai, Adv.
Mrs. Gurinder Jai, Adv.
Mr. Dinesh Pandey, Adv.
Mr. Manu Parashar, Adv.
Mrs. Neha Shanker, Adv.
Mrs. Rubi Kumari, Adv.
Mr. Amit Kumar, Adv.
Mr. Samindra Kumar Tripathi, Adv.
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Application for impleadment is rejected.
The sole petitioner has expired on 04.01.2022. His son has moved an application for permitting him to espouse the cause on behalf of his deceased father. That is because he has also been named in the concerned offences and would be pursuing the same relief which has been rejected by the High Court vide impugned decision.
The fact that the petition filed by the petitioner herein has been rejected, cannot come in the way of his son to pursue appropriate remedy, as may be advised.
Hence, this petition is ordered to be consigned to 3 record as abated.
Liberty is, however, given to the son of petitioner herein (since deceased) to pursue such other remedy on his own behalf, as may be permissible in law. The same be decided by the concerned forum uninfluenced by the observation made in the impugned judgment.
It is further clarified that disposal of this petition will not come in the way of the prosecution to pursue the main case against other accused in accordance with law.
Pending applications, if any, stand disposed of.
(DEEPAK SINGH) (DIPTI KHURANA) COURT MASTER (SH) COURT MASTER (NSH)