Supreme Court - Daily Orders
Vibha Tewari vs The State Of Uttar Pradesh Home ... on 12 January, 2023
Bench: Dinesh Maheshwari, Hrishikesh Roy
1
ITEM NO.18 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). 6495/2015
(Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 23-02-2015
in CRLA No. 937/2011 passed by the High Court Of Judicature At
Allahabad, Lucknow Bench)
VIBHA TEWARI Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH Respondent(s)
Date : 12-01-2023 This petition was called on for hearing today.
CORAM :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH MAHESHWARI
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HRISHIKESH ROY
For Petitioner(s) Mr. Pradeep Rai, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Jetendra Singh, Adv.
Ms. Kalpana Sabharwal, Adv.
Ms. Priyanka Singh, Adv.
Mr. Manoj K. Mishra, Adv.
Ms. Rajshree Rai, Adv.
Mr. Vinay Kumar, Adv.
Mr. Shashank Rai, Adv.
Mr. Arnav Mittal, Adv.
Mr. Ritika Gaur, Adv.
Ms. Banshika Garg, Adv.
Mr. Vipin Kumar Bharti, adv.
Mr. Aishwarya Pratap Shahi, Adv.
Ms. Manju Jetley, AOR
Mr. Vijendra Kumar Kaushik, Adv.
For Respondent(s) Mr. Ankit Goel, AOR
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
O R D E R
Signature Not Verified Digitally signed by We have heard learned counsel for the Neetu Khajuria Date: 2023.01.14 11:17:57 IST Reason: parties and have perused the material placed on record.
2It is noticed on the submissions made on behalf of the respondent-State that the petitions seeking special leave to appeal filed on behalf of the co-accused persons were dismissed by this Court on different dates, including the petition filed on behalf of the husband of the petitioner, being SLP (Crl.) No.782/2016 decided on 08.02.2016. Only one particular matter, in relation to the acquittal of one of the co-accused persons, the previous Investigating Officer, remains pending in this Court, being the subject-matter of Criminal Appeal Nos.1115/2017 and 1130/2017.
Taking note of the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, so far as the present petitioner is concerned, we find no reason to grant special leave to appeal. Hence, this petition is required to be dismissed.
Before parting, we may notice that by way of an application (Crl.M.P. No.7877/2023) seeking permission to file additional documents, it has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that her daughter is an undergraduate student and that the petitioner is suffering from various ailments.
It is also noticed that the petitioner was 3 granted exemption from surrendering way back on 03.08.2015 and thereafter, the matter has remained pending only at admission stage.
The submissions as made in relation to the education of the daughter of the petitioner carry no relevance as such for the present purpose. However, as regards ailment of the petitioner, we deem it proper to observe that after her surrendering, the authorities concerned shall take appropriate steps for providing medical support to the extent necessary.
The petitioner is granted two weeks’ time to surrender to serve out the sentence.
Subject to the observations and requirements foregoing, this special leave petition stands dismissed.
Pending applications also stand disposed of. (NEETU KHAJURIA) (RANJANA SHAILEY) ASTT. REGISTRAR-cum-PS COURT MASTER