Disposed¶28

Pankaj Kumar Sharma & Anr. v. Ms. Xyz & Anr.

Delhi HC1 Apr 2025CRL.REV.P./112/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Keywords: CRL.REV.P. 112/2025; CRL.M.A. 9722-23/2025; Delhi High Court; Amit Sharma, J.; Section 438 read with Sections 442 and 528 BNSS; Criminal Revision 464/2024; Special Judge (NDPS-01), Central District, Tis Hazari; order dated 27.01.2025 set aside; remand to ASJ; denial of opportunity of hearing; natural justice hearing contention; video conferencing appearance; Hyderabad; disposal within two weeks without adjournment; Pankaj Kumar Sharma v. Ms. XYZ; order dated 01.04.2025; petition disposed of.

What did the court decide?

Petition disposed of on consent: impugned order dated 27.01.2025 set aside and matter remanded to the learned ASJ; parties to appear on 08.04.2025 at 02:15 PM; ASJ requested to dispose within two weeks without adjournment; respondent No. 1 allowed to appear through Video Conferencing Mode. ¶28

Pankaj Kumar Sharma & Anr. Vs Ms. Xyz & Anr. — Delhi HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶28

Issue for consideration

Whether the order dated 27.01.2025 in Criminal Revision 464/2024, allegedly passed without providing the petitioners an opportunity of hearing, should be set aside and the proceedings before the Special Judge (NDPS-01), Central District, Tis Hazari restored. +1 more

¶19

Court's answer

With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the impugned order dated 27.01.2025 was set aside and the matter remanded back to the learned ASJ.

¶23

Ratio / Principle

The parties were directed to appear before the concerned Court on 08.04.2025 at 02:15 PM.

¶24

Key takeaways

The learned ASJ was requested to dispose of the petition within two weeks from the date of the fixed hearing, without granting adjournment to either party.ratio¶25
Respondent No. 1, being resident of Hyderabad, was permitted to appear before the concerned Court through Video Conferencing Mode.ratio¶27

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Delhi High Court (Amit Sharma, J.), CRL.REV.P. 112/2025 — Petition under Sections 438, 442 and 528 BNSS sought quashing of the order dated 27.01.2025 in Criminal Revision 464/2024 passed by the Special Judge (NDPS-01), Central District, Tis Hazari, on the allegation that it was passed without affording the petitioners an opportunity of hearing; respondent No. 1 contended notice had been issued and none appeared. With consent of counsel, the impugned order was set aside and the matter remanded to the learned ASJ; parties directed to appear on 08.04.2025 at 02:15 PM; ASJ requested to dispose of the matter within two weeks without adjournment; respondent No. 1 permitted to appear by video conferencing from Hyderabad. Petition stood disposed of by order dated 01.04.2025.

¶1

$~62

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- CRL.REV.P. 112/2025 & CRL.M.A. 9722-23/2025

¶4

PANKAJ KUMAR SHARMA & ANR. .....Petitioners

¶5

Through: Mr. Mukesh Suman and Mr. Sachin Anand, Advs.

¶6

versus

¶7

MS. XYZ & ANR. .....Respondents

¶8

Through: Mr. Sanjeev Sabharwal, Adv. for the State.

¶9

Mr. Samart Singh, Adv. for R-1.

¶10

CORAM:

¶11

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT SHARMA

¶12

O R D E R

¶13

% 01.04.2025

¶14

This hearing has been done through hybrid mode.

¶15

The present petition under Section 438 read with Sections 442 and 528 of the BNSS seeks following prayers: -

¶16

“(i) Call for records of Criminal Revision Petition bearing No 464/2024 titled …. Vs. Pankaj & Ors. allowed by Special Judge (NDPS -01) Central District, Tis Hazari.

¶17

(ii) Quash and set aside the order dated 27.01.2025 in Criminal Revision 464/ 2024 passed by Special Judge, (NDPS- 01), Central District, Tis Hazari Courts and restore the proceedings before Special Judge, (NDPS- 01), Central District, Tis Hazari Courts in Criminal Revision 464/ 2024.

¶18

(iii). Pass such other and further orders as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in interest of justice.”

¶19

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of petitioners states that the impugned order was passed without providing opportunity of hearing to the petitioners.

¶20

Per contra , learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent No.1 submits that the notice was issued and none had appeared on behalf of the petitioners on the said day when the impugned order was passed.

¶21

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 04/04/2025 at 13:55:56

¶22

Be that as it may, with the consent of the learned counsels for the parties, following directions are passed:-

¶23

a) The impugned order dated 27.01.2025 is set aside and the matter is remanded back to the learned ASJ.

¶24

b) The parties shall appear before the concerned Court on 08.04.2025 at 02:15 PM.

¶25

c) Learned ASJ is requested to dispose of the petition within a period of two weeks from the date of hearing so fixed without giving adjournment to either of the parties.

¶26

At this stage, learned counsel for respondent No. 1 further submits that the latter is residing in Hyderabad, and therefore, she may be allowed to appear through Video Conferencing Mode before the concerned Court.

¶27

In these circumstances, respondent No. 1 is allowed to appear before the concerned Court through Video Conferencing Mode.

¶28

The petition stands disposed of in the aforesaid terms.

¶29

Copy of the order be sent to the concerned Court for necessary information and compliance.

¶30

AMIT SHARMA, J

¶31

APRIL 01, 2025/NG

¶32

Click here to check corrigendum, if any

¶33

This is a digitally signed order.

¶34

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 04/04/2025 at 13:55:56

Pankaj Kumar Sharma & Anr. v. Ms. Xyz & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pankaj Kumar Sharma & Anr. v. Ms. Xyz & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Satvik Bhardwaj Vs State Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Anr.

Sonu @ Ajay Vs State Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Ravinder Sharma Vs Central Bureau of Investigation

Ritesh Chauhan Vs State Govt. of NCT of Delhi

Prashant@Kittu Vs the State Govt of NCT of Delhi and Anr.

Amir Vs State NCT of Delhi and Anr.