Delhi High Court - Orders
Hitesh Bhardwaj vs State (Nct Of Delhi) & Ors on 28 July, 2022
Author: Mukta Gupta
Bench: Mukta Gupta
$~12 to 14
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ CRL.A. 19/2021, CRL.M.A. 664/2021, CRL.M.A.665/2021,
CRL.M.A. 1132/2021, CRL.M.A. 1133/2021, CRL.M.A. 4552/2022
CRL.M.A. 4553/2022
HITESH BHARDWAJ ..... Appellant
Represented by: Dr. Atul Singh, Adv.
versus
STATE (NCT OF DELHI) & ORS. ..... Respondent
Represented by: Mr. Prithu Garg, APP for State with
Insp. Brijesh Kumar, PS. Vasant Kunj
South.
Mr. V.P. Rana, Ms. Jyoti Nambiar,
Adv. for R-6.
Mr. Ravinder K. Yadav, Mr. Vinay
Mohan Sharma, Ms. Arti Anupriya,
Mr. Kartickey, Mr. Raghav Anthwal,
Mr. Abhimanyu, Advs. for R-7.
+ CRL.L.P. 20/2021, CRL.M.A. 1989/2021
STATE ..... Petitioner
Represented by: Mr. Prithu Garg, APP for State with
Insp. Brijesh Kumar, PS. Vasant Kunj
South.
versus
RAKESH @NANHA & ORS. ..... Respondent
Represented by: Mr. V.P. Rana, Ms. Jyoti Nambiar,
Adv. for R-5.
Mr. Ravinder K. Yadav, Mr. Vinay
Mohan Sharma, Ms. Arti Anupriya,
Mr. Kartickey, Mr. Raghav Anthwal,
Mr. Abhimanyu, Advs. for R-6.
+ CRL.A. 419/2020, CRL.M.A. 7864/2022, CRL.M.A. 14601/2022,
CRL.M.A. 14602/2022
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed By:ATISH
GOEL
Signing Date:30.07.2022
12:47:11
SAMITA BHARDWAJ ..... Appellant
Represented by: Mr. Tanveer Ahmed Mir, Mr. Atul
Singh, Mr. Sand Khan, Ms. Swati
Khanna, Mr. Faisal Ahmed, Advs.
versus
THE STATE AND ORS ..... Respondent
Represented by: Mr. Prithu Garg, APP for State with
Insp. Brijesh Kumar, PS. Vasant Kunj
South.
Mr. V.P. Rana, Ms. Jyoti Nambiar,
Adv. for R-6.
Mr. Ravinder K. Yadav, Mr. Vinay
Mohan Sharma, Ms. Arti Anupriya,
Mr. Kartickey, Mr. Raghav Anthwal,
Mr. Abhimanyu, Advs. for R-7.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANISH DAYAL
ORDER
% 28.07.2022
1. CRL.L.P. 20/2021 has been sought by the State with respect to the acquittal of the seven accused whereas CRL.A. Nos. 19/2021 and 419/2020 have been filed by the son and daughter-in-law of the deceased Deepak Bhardwaj for whose alleged murder his son Nitesh Bhardwaj/ respondent No.5 in CRL.L.P. 20/2021 was tried as an accused and along with co- accused has been acquitted.
2. During the pendency of the appeal Nitesh Bhardwaj challenged the very maintainability of CRL.A. 419/2020 instituted by Samita Bhardwaj, the daughter-in-law of the deceased Deepak Bhardwaj.
3. Learned counsel for the parties have produced before this Court the order dated 2nd May, 2022 passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in SLP (Crl.) No. 3809/2022 whereby the Hon'ble Supreme Court noted that in Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:ATISH GOEL Signing Date:30.07.2022 12:47:11 view of the decision in Mallikarjun Kodagali (Dead) Vs. The State of Karnataka (2019) 2 SCC 752 a victim is not required to file an application for leave to appeal. Hence no notice was required to be issued in the Special Leave Petition. Hon'ble Supreme Court also noted that it had not examined the aspect whether Samita Bhardwaj would be a victim or not and entitled to file an appeal. It was left open to the petitioner therein i.e. Nitesh Bhardwaj to raise this contention before this Court in accordance with law.
4. Learned counsel for Samita Bhardwaj refers to the full Bench decision of this Court in Ram Phal Vs. State & Ors. (2015) 3 DLT (Crl.) 88 wherein this Court held that the definition of victim in Section 2 (wa) cannot be interpreted so as to result in excluding the legal heirs who would have suffered an emotional harm as well, such as father or siblings of deceased victim or other categories of person based on proximity, noted previously.
5. Learned counsel for Samita Bhardwaj states that maintaining this present appeal is necessary for the reason Hitesh Bhardwaj, her husband who has filed CRL.A. 19/2021, is now no more interested in pursuing the appeal for the reason he has settled the matter with his brother Nitesh Bhardwaj and that in the civil suit filed by Nitesh Bhardwaj both the brothers have filed a joint application under Order XXIII Rule 3 CPC resulting in decree of the suit in terms of the settlement.
6. Dr. Atul Singh, Advocate who had filed his vakalatnama in CRL.A. 19/2021 states that yesterday he had received instructions from Mr. Hitesh Bhardwaj stating that the learned counsel need not appear in the matter and thus he be discharged.
7. Mr. Hitesh Bhardwaj is directed to be present in Court on the next date of hearing.
Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:ATISH GOEL Signing Date:30.07.2022 12:47:118. List on 12th October, 2022.
9. Order be uploaded on the website of this Court.
MUKTA GUPTA, J.
ANISH DAYAL, J.
JULY 28, 2022 'ga' Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:ATISH GOEL Signing Date:30.07.2022 12:47:11