Disposed¶31

Vikas Tokas @ Vicky v. State of NCT of Delhi

Delhi HC14 Oct 2025W.P.(CRL)/1761/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Furlough rejection challenged by writ petition; duplicate filing of W.P.(CRL) 1761/2025 by DHCLSC legal aid counsel; identical relief already granted in W.P.(Crl) 2241/2025 by coordinate bench; DHCLSC compliance report; inadvertent double filing admitted by arguing counsel; apology accepted; no further directions issued; petition disposed; file consigned to Record Room; Central Jail No. 14 Mandoli; PS Vasant Vihar; Vikas Tokas @ Vicky v. State of NCT of Delhi.

What did the court decide?

In view of the DHCLSC clarification, no further directions are deemed necessary, as Ms. Naiem Jahan Heena has already tendered an apology for the inadvertent duplicate filing, with assurance that it will not be repeated. ¶30

Vikas Tokas @ Vicky Vs State of NCT of Delhi — Delhi HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

$~28

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

W.P.(CRL) 1761/2025 VIKAS TOKAS @ VICKY .....Petitioner Through: Ms. Naiem Jahan, Advocate (DHCLSC)

¶4

versus STATE OF NCT OF DELHI .....Respondent Through: Ms. Rupali Bandhopadhya, ASC for the State with Mr. Abhijeet Kumar, Ms. Amisha Gupta, Advocates along with Insp. Sahi Ram, PS Vasant Vihar

¶5

CORAM:

¶6

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA

¶7

O R D E R % 14.10.2025

¶8

On 18^th August, 2025, this Court passed the following order:

¶9

“ CRL.M.A. 16389/2025 (exemption)

¶10

1. Allowed, subject to all just exceptions. W.P.(CRL) 1761/2025

¶11

2. The petitioner has assailed Order No. F.10(3725553)/CJ /Legal/PHQ/2025/1662 dated 08.05.2025, whereby his application for being released on furlough was rejected.

¶12

3. None appears on behalf of petitioner.

¶13

4. However, learned counsel for respondent state appearing on advance intimation points out that the petitioner filed yet another petition for same relief and that petition W.P.(Crl) 2241/2025 was allowed by a coordinate bench of this court. The said order is accepted across the board, to be scanned and made part of the record. 5. Not just the petitioner, even counsel for the petitioner appears to be the same counsel, who filed the previous petition. As per record of this case, the present petition was filed by Mr. Uday Chauhan, jail visiting advocate of DHCLSC and the counsel who appeared on 26.05.2025 in this case was Ms. Naiem Jahan Heena, Advocate. Same Ms. Naiem

¶14

This is a digitally signed order.

¶15

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 15/10/2025 at 12:24:11

¶16

Jahan Heena, Advocate appeared before the coordinate bench in W.P.(Crl) 2241/2025. It is indeed a serious issue. It needs to be ascertained if DHCLSC is maintaining any record of the proceedings filed through legal aid counsel in order to ensure no duplicity of the proceedings.

¶17

6. Copy of this order be sent to DHCLSC with the direction to submit a detailed report.

¶18

7. Notice be also issued to the counsel Mr. Uday Chauhan, Advocate, who filed the present petition despite pendency of another petition for same relief and having not appeared today.

¶19

8. Relist on 14.10.2025.”

¶20

In compliance with the Court’s directions, the compliance report has been received from Delhi High Court Legal Services Committee to the following effect:

¶21

“Respected Sir,

¶22

In compliance of order dated 18.08.2025 passed in "Writ Petition (Criminal) No. 1761/2025 case titled Vikas Tokas @ Vicky Vs. State of NCT of Delhi “by Hon'ble Mr. Justice Girish Kathpalia wherein it was directed to submit a detailed report regarding the duplicate filing of the writ petition.

¶23

In this regard it is submitted that:-

¶24

A. On receipt of the order, DHCLSC took prompt action and explanation has been sought from Mr. Uday Chauhan Ld. JVA, DHCLSC and Ms. Naiem Jahan Heena Ld. Arguing Counsel of Criminal Panel II, DHCLSC vide email dated 15/9/2025.

¶25

B. Mr. Uday Chuahan vide email dated 19/9/2025 submitted that he had neither filed the present petition i.e. writ petition (crl) No. 1761/2025 nor he had filed the writ petition (crl) No. 2241/2025 which was disposed off. In fact Mr. Chauhan is on Jail Visiting Panel and had only drafted one single writ petition on behalf of the inmate Vikas Tokas on 13/5/2025 at the Legal Cell of Central Jail No. 14, Mandoli, Delhi and scanned/soft copy of the same was duly forwarded by the Jail Superintendent on 19/5/2025 to DHCLSC via email and thereafter DHCLSC vide appointment letter dated 21/5/2025 marked/assigned the same to Ms. Naiem Jahan Heena, Ld. Arguing Counsel of Criminal Panel II for filing and arguing the same before the Hon'ble High Court (copy attached). Vide email dated 17/9/2025 it is aidmitted by Ms. Naiem Jahan Heena, LAC that the said case was filed by her twice inadvertently. Her clerk had filed it by mistake. She has further apologized for the same and submitted that this kind of mistake will not be repeated in future (copy attached).

¶26

This is a digitally signed order.

¶27

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 15/10/2025 at 12:24:11

¶28

It is pertinent to mention that Delhi High Court Legal Services Committee takes proper caution during marking of the case received from the Jail and as per the record the matter was marked only once to Ms. Naiem Jahan Heena and it is the said counsel who inadvertently file it twice without intimation to the committee.

¶29

The report is submitted with a request to kindly place the same before the Hon’ble Court where the said matter is listed for 14.10.2025.”

¶30

In view of the above clarification, no further directions are deemed necessary, as Ms. Naiem Jahan Heena has already tendered an apology for the inadvertent error on her part, with the assurance that the same shall not be repeated again.

¶31

Disposed of.

¶32

The file be consigned to the Record Room.

¶33

SANJEEV NARULA, J

¶34

OCTOBER 14, 2025/ab

¶35

This is a digitally signed order.

¶36

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 15/10/2025 at 12:24:11

Vikas Tokas @ Vicky v. State of NCT of Delhi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vikas Tokas @ Vicky v. State of NCT of Delhi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ratan Lal Gupta Vs State (Govt of NCT of Delhi) & Ors.

Ramesh & Ors. Vs the State Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

Rhrypto Trader Pvt. Ltd. Vs State of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

Ms Ratna Manjusha Garuda Vs Dr. Sridhar Garuda and Ors.

Shubhi Srivastava Advocate Vs Union of India and Ors.

Nazim & Ors. Vs the State Govt of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Usha Rani Alias Meena Vs State Govt of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Umair Siddiqui Vs the Commissioner of Police

Rajeev Sharma Vs Smt. Geeta

Mohd Mateen Vs the State NCT of Delhi and Anr.

Mohd Ishrat @ Salman Vs State through SHO & Anr.

Vikash Kumar & Ors. Vs State of NCT of Delhi & Anr. & Ors.

Akshay Bhatnagar Vs State of NCT of Delhi

Vimal Kumar & Ors. Vs State of Delhi & Ors.