Chudiyaan Bantih Hain Dukakanon Mein-Aazmayish (1995)Release Date: 21 April 1995 (India)

Loading...

Sign in or sign up now!
Alert icon
Upgrade to the latest Flash Player for improved playback performance. Upgrade now or more info.
4,965
Loading...
Alert icon
Sign in or sign up now!
Alert icon

Uploaded by on Apr 24, 2009

O R D E R
13.10.2006
Crl. M. No.11363/2006
Issue notice, returnable on 20th November, 2006. R.S. SODHI, J. P.K.BHASIN, J.
OCTOBER 13, 2006
'AA'
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CRL.A. 193/2006 STATE ..... Appellant
Through: Mr.Gopal Subramaniam, ASG with
Ms.Mukta Gupta, Standing Counsel and Mr.
Ashwini Vaish, Advocate.




versus SIDHARTHA VASHISHT and ORS. ..... Respondents
Through: Mr.Ram Jethmalani, Sr.Advocate
with Pt.R.K.Naseem and Mr.Manu Sharma,
Mr.Harish Ghai, Mr.P.R.Mala, Ms.Lata
Krishnamurthy, Mr.Sachin Dev Sharma and
Mr.Sanjeev Manan Advocates for
respondents 1,5,6 and 8.
Mr.S.K.Sharma, K.N.Balagopal and
Mr.A.P.Mukandan and Mr.G.K.Bharti,
Advocates for respondent No.2.
From the reading of the application and the arguments addressed by learned counsel for the parties, we find that the respondent/applicant is greatly concerned about the criticism that this court may be open to at the end of the proceedings. He is anxious to insulate the Court from that onslaught.
While appreciating the concern of the respondent/applicant, we may point out that in our criminal justice system, up to the stage of High Court, we adopt a procedure of open court hearing. All orders of this court are made in public gaze open to expert criticism and public debate as also to the review by a final forum.

The news item over which the respondent/applicant feels perturbed is a stale representation and cannot be said to have taken any of the parties by surprise. Insulating ourselves from constructive criticisms would result in grave injustice.
The matter has proceeded to a great length without any reservations and cannot be allowed to be derailed on that account. In this view of the matter the concern of the respondent need not detain us any further.
However, we may also point out that the Supreme Court in M.P.Lohia Vs. State of West Bengal and Anr. JT 2005(2) SC 105 has taken great exception to the reports appearing in the Press that may tend to prejudice the atmosphere against the accused. The relevant portion of the judgment is para 10 which reads as under:-

?10. Having gone through the records, we find one disturbing factor which we feel is necessary to comment upon in the interest of justice. The death of Chandni took place on 28th February, 2002 and the complaint in this regard was registered and the investigation was in progress.
The application for grant of anticipatory bail was disposed of by the High Court of Calcutta on 13.2.2004 and Special Leave Petition was pending before this Court. Even then an article has appeared in a magazine called 'Saga' titled ?Doomed by Dowry? written by one
Kakoli Poddar based on her interview of the family of the deceased. Giving version of the tragedy an extensively quoting the father of the deceased as to his version of the case. The facts narrated therein are all materials that may
be used in the forthcoming trial in this case and we have no hesitation that this type of articles appearing in the media would certainly interfere with the administration of justice. We deprecate this practice and caution the publisher,editor and journalist who were responsible for the said article against indulging in such trial by media when the issue is subjudiced.
However, to prevent any further issue being raised in this regard, we treat this matter as closed and hope that the other concerned in journalism would take note of this displeasure expressed by us for interfering with the administration of justice.?
Learned counsel Mr.Ram Jethmalani complains of a campaign let lose against his taking up this case, at the same time he does not want anyone to be sent to jail. We can, but lament, if there be such an attempt. Every counsel is duty bound to defend his client to the best of his ability irrespective of the acts complained of. Any interference with the conduct of the counsel of the case, by any quarters, would be viewed with great severity. It could also amount to contempt per se.
In view of what we have stated above, the application of the respondent is dismissed.
CRL.A. 193/2006
Adjourned at the request of Mr.Ram Jethmalani, who wants to reconsider his position.
List on 08th November, 2006.

Category:

Entertainment

Tags:

License:

Standard YouTube License

  • likes, 0 dislikes

Link to this comment:

Share to:
see all

All Comments (1)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • kiya song hja aur kiya pic ha samj nai a raha

Loading...

Alert icon
0 / 00Unsaved Playlist Return to active list
    1. Your queue is empty. Add videos to your queue using this button:
      or sign in to load a different list.
    Loading...Loading...Saving...
    • Clear all videos from this list
    • Learn more