Application under Section 403 BNSS by an advocate whose name was inadvertently recorded as an accused in a prior judgment's summary of trial court proceedings. The Court allowed rectification, removing her name from paragraph 19 and directing the order to be read with the judgment.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
$~SB-1
versus
STATE GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI .....Respondent Through: Mr. Amit Prasad, SPP for State with Mr. Akhand Pratap Singh, SPP, Mr. Harshil Jain and Mr. Saravjeet Singh, Advocates.
Insp. Sandeep Kharab, HC Manish (Special Cell/NDR)
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBRAMONIUM PRASAD HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH VAIDYANATHAN SHANKAR
O R D E R % 08.09.2025 CRL.M.A. 26758/2025 (Exemption)
Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
CRL.M.A. 26757/2025
Page 1 of 4
CRL.A. 1207/2024
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 11/09/2025 at 12:26:01
not an “Accused”. Paragraph No.19 of the Judgment dated 02.09.2025 reads as under:
“19. To ascertain the correct picture, it is pertinent to sum-up the proceedings of the Trial Court and the same are tabulated as under:–
| DATE OF THE | _SUMMARY OF THETRIALCOURT’S _ |
|---|---|
| ORDER | ORDER-SHEETS |
| xxx | xxx |
| 11.09.2023 | - The accused persons namely, |
| Devangana Kalita, Natasha |
|
| Narwal, Sowjhanya Shankaran, |
|
| Asif Iqbal Tanha objected to | |
| commencement of arguments on | |
| charge as the investigation is still ongoing. |
|
| - Learned SPP stated that he is |
|
| ready to begin the arguments and | |
| objections were raised that despite | |
| giving considerable period of time |
|
| for starting the arguments on | |
| charge, no adjournment |
|
| application was moved on time. He stated that the accused persons will |
|
| later claim bail on the ground of delay in trial. |
|
| - The Appellant herein,Tasleem |
|
| Ahmedhas submitted that he |
Page 2 of 4
CRL.A. 1207/2024
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 11/09/2025 at 12:26:01
| wants the | arguments on charge to | |
|---|---|---|
| begin. | ||
| xxx | xxx |
“19. To ascertain the correct picture, it is pertinent to sum-up the proceedings of the Trial Court and the same are tabulated as under:–
| DATE OF THE | _SUMMARY OF THETRIALCOURT’S _ |
|---|---|
| ORDER | ORDER-SHEETS |
| xxx | xxx |
| 11.09.2023 | - The accused persons namely, |
| Devangana Kalita, Natasha |
|
| Narwal, Asif Iqbal Tanha objected | |
| to commencement of arguments on | |
| charge as the investigation is still | |
| ongoing. | |
| - Learned SPP stated that he is |
|
| ready to begin the arguments and | |
| objections were raised that despite | |
| giving considerable period of time | |
| for starting the arguments on | |
| charge, no adjournment |
|
| application was moved on time. He |
Page 3 of 4
CRL.A. 1207/2024
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 11/09/2025 at 12:26:01
stated that the accused persons will
later claim bail on the ground of
delay in trial.
-
The Appellant herein, Tasleem
Ahmed has submitted that he
wants the arguments on charge to
begin.
xxx xxx
SUBRAMONIUM PRASAD, J.
HARISH VAIDYANATHAN SHANKAR, J.
SEPTEMBER 08, 2025 S. Zakir
Page 4 of 4
CRL.A. 1207/2024
This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 11/09/2025 at 12:26:01
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the name of the applicant advocate, erroneously recorded as an accused in paragraph 19 of the judgment dated 02.09.2025, should be removed.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Tasleem Ahmed
State Govt. of NCT of Delhi
Sowjhanya Shankaran
Subramonium Prasad
Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
