MOST URGENT D-2

DECIDED

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHIAT NEW DELHI

No. / drQi of Deiit SeavRS Judipated

From: Diy
The Registrar General, Datsd.:
High Court of Delhi, New Dethi Districi
New Delhi
To,
1.The Ld. Principal District & Sessions Judge, Headquarter, Delhi.
Central Delhi, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi.
2. The Ld. Principal District & Sessions Judge,
Hazari Courts, Delhi.
3. The Ld. Principal District & Sessions Judge, North Distt., Tis
Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi.
4. The Ld. Principal District & Sessions Judge, West Distt.,
House Courts, Delhi.
3. The Ld. Principal District & Sessions Judge, New Delhi., Patiala
KKD Courts, Delhi.
6. The Ld. Principal District & Sessions Judge, East Distt.,
Distt., KKDCourts, Delhi.
7. The Ld. Principal District & Sessions Judge, North-East
Distt., KKD Courts, Delhi.
8. The Ld. Principal District & Sessions Judge, Shahdara
Rohini Courts, Delhi.
9. The Ld. Principal District & Sessions Judge, North-West Distt.,
Courts, Delhi.
10. The Ld. PrincipalDistrict & Sessions Judge, Outer Distt., Rohini
Dwarka Courts, Delhi.
11. The Ld. Principal District & Sessions Judge, South-west Distt.
Distt., Saket Courts, Delhi.
12. The Ld. Principal District & Sessions Judge, South
Distt. Saket Courts, Delhi.
13. The Ld. Principal District & Sessions Judge, South-East
Rouse Avenue Courts, Delhi.
14. The Ld. Principal District & Sessions Judge, CBI Distt.,
Karkardooma Courts, Delhi.
15. The Addl. Sessions Judge (FTC),Shahdara District,
High Court New Delhi.
16. The Deputy Registrar, Gazette Branch, Delhi
(Inspecting Judges Committee)

16152/2024
WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) NO. 1657/2024 & CRL.M.A.
MANNASINGH & ANR. Petitioner(s)
VERSUS

STATE OF NCT OF DELHI& ORS. Respondent (s)

CONSTITUTION OF INDIA RW
WRIT PETITION UDNER ARTICLE 226 OFTHE
OR ANY OTHER WRIT
SECTION 482 CRPCFOR ISSUANCE OF WRIT OF MANDAMUS THAT THE
DECLARATION DECLARING
OR DIRECTION IN THE NATURE OF THE
CUSTODY ON
ARREST OR AN ACT OF TAKING ACCUSEDIPETITIONERS INTO THE
THERE BEING ANY JUDICIAL ORDER CONVICTING
18.05.2024 WITHOUT
PETITIONER, IS ILLEGAL, AND FOR OTHER DIRECTIONS.
Sir,
Iam directed to forward herewith for immediate
judgment/order dated 22.05.2024 passed in the above compliance/necessary action a copy o
case by Hon'ble Mr. Justice Navir
Chawla of this Court.

Necessary directions are contained in the enclosed copy of order.

Yours faiyhfully

Encl :Copy of order dated 22.05.2024 A.O.J. (Crl.)

memo of parties for Registrar General
 6

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

(Extraordinary Original criminal Jurisdiction)
WP (CRL) NO. 2024

IN THE MATTER OF:

...PETITIONER
Munna Singh & Anr.
VERSUS

Sate of NCT of Delhi & Ors. ...RESPONDENTS

MEMO OF PARTIES

1. Munna Singh
S/o Shri Chandrika Singh
R/o 16/1, Khasra No. 18/18,
Gali No. 32/1, Block C-3, 30 Feet Marg,
...Petitioner No.
Harsh Vihar, Mandoli, Noth west Delhi, Delhi 93
1

2. Vinod Singh @ Vinod Singh Bhadauriya

S/oShri Ramesh Singh
R/o K 606, Gali No. 3, Gautam Vihar,
Garhi Mendu, North East Delhi
...Petitioner No. 2
Delhi

Counsel Details:
Name: Kamlesh Kumar Mishra
Mobile No.: 9582388509
EmailId: [email protected]:
Versus
1. State of NCT of Delhi
Through the Secretary Home
Delhi Secretariat, New Delhi ...Respondent No.1
 7

2. High Court of Delhi at New Delhi

Through Registrar General
Shershah Road,
New Delhi
...Respondent No.2
Counsel Details: Name:
Mobile No.:
Email Id: [email protected]

3. Crime Branch East

Through the DCP
DELHI POLICE HEADQUARTERS,
JAI SINGH ROAD, NEW DELHI
Pincode: 110001
No.3 ...Respondent
Counsel Details:
Name: SANJAY LAO
Mobile No.:
Email Id: [email protected];
Filed by:

KAMLESH KUMAR MISHRA & RENU

FOR CORPUS JURIS
INDIA
ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER(S)
346A, Lawyers Chamber Block I,
DATED: 20.05.2024 Delhi High Court, Delhi 110003
PLEACE: NEW DELHI
[email protected]
 OF DEL 2024:DHC:4267

$-73
IN THE HÊGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW
DELHI
Date of decision: 22.05.2024
W.P.(CRL)-1657/2024 & CRLM.A. 16152/2024
MUNNA SINGH & ANR. ... Petitioners
Through: Mr.Kamlesh Kr. Mishra,
Ms.Renu, Ms.Manya Mishra,
Mr.Dipak Raj Singh,
Mr.Yashvardhan and
Ms.Shivani Verma, Advs.
versus
STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS. ..... Respondents
Through: Mr.Amol Sinha, ASC (Crl),
Mr.Kshitiz Garg, Mr.Ashvini
Kumar, Ms.Zhavi Lazarus,
Advs. with SI Sachin Gulia.
Mr.Aman Usman, APP
Mr.Shashank Garg and
Ms.Aradhya Chaturvedi, Advs.
for R-2/RG,DHC.

CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN CHAWLA
NAVIN CHAWLA, J. (ORAL)
1. This petition has been filed under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India read with Section 482 of the Code of
Criminal Procedurè, 1973 (in short, 'Cr.P.C.'), praying for a
declaration that the arrest of the petitioners made on 18.05.2024
in relation to the Criminal case, being SC no. 652/2016, titled
State v. Dharam Pal Etc., without there being any judicial
Order convicting the petitioners, was illegal.

W.P.(CRL)-1657/2024 Page l of8

 the the FIR Delhi,learned
Additional
Sessions
Delhi,that
the is the and Courtcompliance into were
petitioners Order on the stated present
20.05.2024,
2024:DHC:4267 It consideration/judgment.
for in trial.of recorded taken takento
trial the Branch, Courts, Trial furnished. custody the Court
application
counsel stated the of8
2Page
the statement of not 23.05.2024.
facingof in the were filed
learned on copy Trial
is of
out Crime Karkardooma
was bonds into therefore,also
It course already
whenthey petitioners
learned
are Cr.P.C. counsels. a was the learned
arising Court'). them
the the bail seeking
petitioners Station: Court,
18.05.2024, showed before
the not
15.05.2024, same
the 15.05.2024,
the for
deposit taking petitioners,
Trial during if their the the
Case the District, 18.05.2024 Cr.P.C., Trial application or
background, Police of the whereafter,
merely
CoURT
DE
313 to to
orders on situation,
OF
the before the Bail learned or passed
Criminal petitioners
on however,
that at as
Shahdara Section dated the the
petitioners
registered to granted on that no Reader
adjudication on of that an this
contends referred that up order 437A the move Court,be
brief however,
abovementioned under the
stated
before stated 18.05.2024, will with
were put
the the W.P.(CRL)-165
(FTC), stated the Order
a No.71/2024 (hereinafter was
petitioners
directed
Section
is to
to and Trial Faced
As petitioners petitioners
By appeared is tried
pending case It custody,
supplied
It the
learned
record, petition.
Judge further
evendated
the also with that
2. 3. 4. 5. 6.
 GOURTOF OEL 2024:DNG:4267

7. The petition was listed yesterday, on being mentioncd.

8 This Court by an Order dated 21.05.2024, recorded the
submission of the learned counscl for the petitioners that the
Order dated 18.05.2024 has now becn uploaded on the wcbsite,
however, the judgment on conviction, of the same day, is still
not available on the website nor has been supplied to the
) petitioner or their counsels. The petition was, therefore, listed
for today for the learned counsel for thc respondent no.2 to seek
instructions in this regard.
9. In the pre-lunch session, when the matter was called, the
situation still remained the same and the judgment on
conviction was still not available on thc website. It had also not
been supplied to the petitioners as the petitioners had not been
produced from jail.
10. The learned Registrar General of this Court was
therefore, directed to telephonically seek a report from the
learned Trial Court, concerning the judgment that is purported
to have been pronounced on 18.05.2024 in SC no. 652/2016
titled State v. Dharam Pal Etc., convicting the petitioners
herein, as also on, if it already stands pronounced, then why the
same has still not been uploaded on the website. The report was
directed to be placed before this Court at 04.00 PM, today itself.
11. At 04.00 P.M., when the pctition was called again, the
learned counsel for the respondcnt no.2, on instructions,
informed that the judgment dated 18.05.2024 has now been
uploaded on the website and has also been sent to the petitioners

WP.(CRL)-1657/2024 Page 3 of8

-1657/2024 13.
infirmity 12.
through

Section The
the
in
tinstant
heconcerned
of manner
be(1), officershallthereof
(4) shall with (cread
) is(3)Openthereof officer
onhand, clause (2) parties jurisdiction
termination
time by trial"353. 353
th e
immediately the Where ofWhere it the procedure
parties be his Court. the Where
sub-section be which
substance
his judgment; of
Judgment.-()
presiding in of petition
whole
specified signed own in signshall (a) pleader. the (cjudgment;
) or(b) or(a) whichor
opendated date as any the
the the soon their Jail
cause of the judgment by by by of shall
judgment hand, of the isreading Cr.P.C.
or judgment
by judgment out Superintendent.
thmade
e Court, and the sub-section
as judgmentunderstood of reading delivering
pleaders,notice the Criminal followed
presents DELA OF
in him. transcript it officer
trial be
ir every (1),under it the pronounced
pléaders clause signed delivery is to
available and as be judgment out reads
ora made and out shall or The
is page clause or taken the immediately by
pronounced if
the (1), is by the Court
at judgment
copy (c) th e of and the some as the the
it by
case ready, delivered operative
explaining be
free for the the
of of isthe operative
(b)
down the in whole whole given in under: learned Court
thereof the judgment every accused a
sub-section
ofthe not may
and presiding
subsequent open or
Pageof8 4 cost. judgment presiding or in language afteroriginal in
perusal written clause short under part of of to
shall in be, part writepage Court every with
the or the the th e the the Trial DHC:4267
2024:
it in of
Court.glaring a
 GOURT OF OEL 2024:DHC:4267

(5) If the accused is in custody, he shall be

brought up to hear the judgment pronounced.
() If the accused is not in custody, he shall be
required by the Court to attend to hear the
judgment pronounced, except where his
personal attendance during the trial has been
dispensed with and the sentence is one of fine
only or he is acquitted:
Provided that, where there are more accused
(0 than one, and one or more of them do not
attend the Court on the date on which the
judgment is to be pronounced, the presiding
oficer may, in order to avoid undue delay in
the disposal of the case, pronounce the
judgment notwithstanding their absence.
(7) No judgment delivered by any Criminal
Court shall be deemed to be invalid by reason
onlyof the absence of any party or his pleader
on the day or fron the place notified for the
delivery there of, or of any omission to serve,
or defect in serving, on the parties or their
pleaders, or any of them, the notice of such
day and place.

(8) Nothing in this section shall be construed

to limit in any way the extent of the provisions
of section 465. "

14. A reading of the above would show that the judgment has
to be pronounced in the open Court by the presiding officer
either by delivering the whole of the judgment or by reading out
the whole of the judgment or by reading out the operative part
of the judgment and explaining the substance of the judgment in
a language which is understood by the accused or his pleader,
signing the same on each page in the open Court, and by

W.P.(CRIL)-1657/2024 Page 5 of8

 oURY
Co 2024: DHC: 4267

making a copy thereof immediately available for the perusal of

the parties or their pleaders free of cost.
15. In the present case, this Court has been left with a belief
that on 18.05.2024, when the petitioners were taken into
custody, the judgment on conviction was not even ready with
the learned Trial Court. This belief is strengthened by the Order
dated 18.05.2024, which, it is claimed, was uploaded later, only
on 21.05.2024, on the website by the learned Trial Court. Even
copy of this order is claimed to have not been supplied to the
petitioners. The same reads as under:
"Vide separate judgment of this day,
both the accused are convicted for the
offence (s) charged with. Both the convicts are
taken into custody and remanded to JC.
Put up on 22.05.2024 for supplying the
copy of the judgment.
Put up on 28.05.2024 for arguments on
the point of Sentence as requested by Ld.
Assisting Counsel for the accused.

16. If the judgment was ready, there was no reason for the
learned Trial Court to put the case for supplying copy thereof to
the petitioners on 22.05.2024.
17. Making available a copy of the judgment, at least, for the

perusal of the accused or his/her pleader, is vital as the accused

can avail of a remedy of appeal against the Order/judgment of
conviction immediately without awaiting the Order on sentence.
The accused is also entitled to know the reason for his
conviction and why he/she is being arrested and his/her liberty
being taken away.

W.P.(CRL)-1657/2024 Page 6 of8

 OH
COUA OF
2024: DHC:4267

18. In the present case, not making available a copy of the

judgment on conviction to the accuscd, and taking them into
custody, in my view, therefore, was inappropriate on the part of
the learned Trial Court and denial of not only a Statutory Right
but also a Constitutional Right to the accused, as the judgment
was not read as a whole in'open court.
19. The learned ASC (Crl.) and thc learned APP, however,
state that this would, at best, be a procedural lapse and should
not vitiate the proceedings/the judgment on conviction passed
by the learned Trial Court. Taking into account the judgment of
the Supreme Court in Iqbal Ismail Sodawala v. State of
Maharashtra & Ors., (1975) 3 SCC 140, I am in agreement
with their submission.
20. Now that the said judgment is available with the
petitioners as. also has been stated to be uploaded on the
website, the present petition is disposcd of reserving all liberty
with the petitioners to avail of such remedy as may be available
to them in accordance with law.
21. A copy of this Order shall, howcver, be placed before the
Inspecting Judges Committee' of the Oficer concerned.
22. The learned Principal District and Sessions Judges of all
the Districts Courts in Delhi are requested to sensitize the
presiding judicial officers to pronounce their judgments on
conviction only when they are ready for pronouncement and, in
case where they are convicting the accused and taking the
accused into custody, immediately supply a copy thereof, free

W.P.(CRL)-1657/2024 Page 7 of8

 oUR
2024: DHC:4267

of cost, to the accused for the accused to avail of the remedies

available to them in accordance with law.
23. A copy of this Order be
circulated to the learned
Principal District and Sessions Judges of all the District
Courts
in Delhi.
24. The pending application also stands disposed of.

MAY 22, 2024/ns/AS NAVIN CHAWLA,J

Click here to check corrigendum, ifany

HIG
NEW

WP.(CRL)-1657/2024 Page &of8