Uttarakhand High Court
LC482/580/2003 of P.P.GOSWAMI Vs ADDL. DISTRICT and SESSION JUDGE and ORS. on 4 December 2003
COURT OF UTTARANCHAL AT NAINITAL Lodging No. 580 of 2003 1. P.P. Goswami S/o late Sri Lal Chand Goswami R/o B-97 Shivalik Nagar BHEL Haridwar 2. Y.P. Gupta S/o late Sri M.R. Gupta R/o 10- A Type D BHEL Colony Sector 17 NOIDA (U.P.) …. Applicants Versus 1. Additional District & Session
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARANCHAL AT NAINITAL
Lodging No. 580 of 2003
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. P.P. Goswami S/o late Sri Lal Chand Goswami R/o B-97 Shivalik Nagar BHEL R/o B-97 Shivalik Nagar BHEL
Haridwar
2. Y.P. Gupta S/o late Sri M.R. Gupta R/o 10-A Type D BHEL Colony R/o 10-A Type D BHEL Colony Sector 17 NOIDA (U.P.)
…. Applicants
Versus
1. Additional District & Session Judge/ Special Judge (Anti Corruption) Uttaranchal Dehradun Special Judge (Anti Corruption) Uttaranchal Dehradun
2. C.B.I. through S.P. (CBI) Dehradun
…. Opposite Parties
Hon’ble M.M.Ghildiyal J.
Heard Sri L.K. Tiwari learned counsel for the applicants and Sri U.K. Uniyal learned counsel for the C.B.I.
The applicant has moved this application with a prayer for a direction to the respondent no. 1 to dispose of the S.T. No. 10 of 2002 C.B.I. Vs. V.B. Mittal & others expeditiously as early as possible.
The contention of the applicant is that he is being prosecuted U/s 120-B, 420 I.P.C. and U/s 13(2) read with 13(1)(d) of P.C. Act 1988. The charge-sheets have been submitted by the C.B.I. before the respondent no. 1 and the learned court has taken cognizance on 28.06.2002. The case is lying at the stage of charge even after 1½ years. The applicant is under suspension and due for retirement in next year. It will cause great prejudice to him if the trial is not concluded expeditiously.
On the facts and circumstances, the prayer made by the applicant deserves to be granted. The respondent is directed to conclude the trial as expeditiously as possible. The petition U/s 482 is disposed of accordingly.
(M.M.Ghildiyal J.)