Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Vijay vs.the State

Vijay vs The State

Type Court Judgment Court Delhi Decided Jan 25, 2019
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1220899

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Delhi High Court
Decided On
Subject
Criminal

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Criminal

Key legal issue
Criminal

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Vijay

Respondent

The State

Excerpt

* + in the high court of delhi at new delhi date of order: january 25, 2019 bail appln. 203/2019 vijay through: mr. varun dhingra, advocate .....petitioner versus the state .....respondent through: mr.m.p. singh, additional public prosecutor with si mumtaz ahmad coram: hon'ble mr. justice sunil gaur order (oral) crl.m.a. 1699/2019 (exemption) allowed subject to all just exceptions. bail appln. 203/2019... petitioner is the husband of deceased who seeks regular bail in fir no.19/2014, under sections 498a/304b/34 ipc, registered at police station d.b.g. road, new delhi while claiming that petitioner is in custody for more than five years. learned counsel for petitioner submits that for the last one and half year, investigating officer of this case is not deposing before the trial court and the next date of hearing before the trial court is 7th february, 2019. mr. m.p.singh, additional public prosecutor for respondent-state, accepts notice. bail appln. 203/2019 page 1 of 2 let the additional public prosecutor for respondent-state ensure that the investigating officer of this case appears before the trial court on the date fixed and if for any reason whatsoever, there is no appearance on behalf of above investigation officer, then coercive steps be taken to obtain his presence for a short date. since petitioner is in custody for last more than five years, therefore, instead of appreciating the evidence recorded, it is deemed appropriate to dispose of this application with direction to trial court to make all endeavors to conclude the trial of this case within a period of three months or so. trial court be apprised of this order forthwith to ensure its compliance. with aforesaid directions, this application is disposed of. january25 2019 v (sunil gaur) judge bail appln. 203/2019 page 2 of 2

Full Judgment

* + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Order: January 25, 2019 BAIL APPLN. 203/2019 VIJAY Through: Mr. Varun Dhingra, Advocate .....Petitioner versus THE STATE .....Respondent Through: Mr.M.P. Singh, Additional Public Prosecutor with SI Mumtaz Ahmad CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR

ORDER

(ORAL) Crl.M.A. 1699/2019 (Exemption) Allowed subject to all just exceptions. BAIL APPLN. 203/2019

... Petitioner

is the husband of deceased who seeks regular bail in FIR No.19/2014, under Sections 498A/304B/34 IPC, registered at police station D.B.G. Road, New Delhi while claiming that petitioner is in custody for more than five years. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that for the last one and half year, Investigating Officer of this case is not deposing before the trial court and the next date of hearing before the trial court is 7th February, 2019. Mr. M.P.Singh, Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent-State, accepts notice. BAIL APPLN. 203/2019 Page 1 of 2 Let the Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent-State ensure that the Investigating Officer of this case appears before the trial court on the date fixed and if for any reason whatsoever, there is no appearance on behalf of above Investigation Officer, then coercive steps be taken to obtain his presence for a short date. Since petitioner is in custody for last more than five years, therefore, instead of appreciating the evidence recorded, it is deemed appropriate to dispose of this application with direction to trial court to make all endeavors to conclude the trial of this case within a period of three months or so. Trial court be apprised of this order forthwith to ensure its compliance. With aforesaid directions, this application is disposed of. JANUARY25 2019 v (SUNIL GAUR) JUDGE BAIL APPLN. 203/2019 Page 2 of 2

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial