VODAFONE MOBILE SERVICES LTD FORMERLY KNOWN AS VODAFONE SOUTH LTD Vs. LALIT K GUPTA

Supreme Court of India (Division Bench (DB)- Two Judge)

Appeal (Crl.), 156-157 of 2017, Judgment Date: Jan 20, 2017

                                                              NON-REPORTABLE

                        IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
                       CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                     CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 156-157 OF 2017
             [@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRL) NO. 589-590 OF 2017
        [@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRL).....CRL.M.P. NO.1178 OF 2017]



VODAFONE MOBILE SERVICES LTD (FORMERLY KNOWN
AS VODAFONE SOUTH LTD)                                          APPELLANT(S)

                                VERSUS

LALIT K GUPTA                                                  RESPONDENT(S)

                               J U D G M E N T

KURIAN, J.
1.    Delay condoned.

2.    Leave granted.

3.    In the nature of the order we propose to pass, it is not necessary  to
issue notice to the respondent.

4.    In CRM No. M-25888 of 2013 (O & M) on the file of the  High  Court  of
Punjab  and  Haryana,  the  appellant  was  granted  an  interim  order   on
08.08.2013 in respect of the proceedings pending before the Trial  Court  in
Crl. Complaint No. 8 of 2012 on the file of JMIC,  Chandigarh.   It  appears
that the High Court was not quite happy with the fact that when  the  matter
was called out for final hearing, the counsel for the petitioner before  the
High Court was not ready and hence, the interim order was vacated.

5.    Sh.  Siddharth  Luthra,  learned  senior  counsel  appearing  for  the
appellant before this Court, submits that the  petitioner  before  the  High
Court was always ready except only on that day due to some inconvenience  to
the learned senior counsel appearing in the matter.

6.    Be that as it may, it is  seen  that  the  appellant  has  immediately
filed CRM No. 38447 of 2016 in CRM No. M-25888 of 2013  praying  for  recall
of the order dated 26.09.2016 and requested for continuance of  the  interim
order till the matter is disposed of by the High Court.

7.    The said petition is pending before the High  Court.   Meanwhile,  the
learned Magistrate has issued summons  since  the  interim  order  had  been
vacated.
8.    Having heard the learned senior counsel appearing  for  the  appellant
and having regard to the facts and circumstances referred to above,  we  are
of the view that the interest of justice would be served if the  High  Court
is requested to dispose of Crl. M.P. No. 38447 of 2016 along with CRM No. M-
25888 of 2013 expeditiously and defer the proceedings before the  Magistrate
till such time.

9.    We dispose of these appeals with  a  request  to  the  High  Court  to
dispose of Crl. M.P. No. 38447 of 2016 along with CRM No.  M-25888  of  2013
expeditiously.   Till  the  main  petition  is  disposed  of,  the   interim
protection originally granted to the appellant herein, as  per  order  dated
08.08.2013 passed by the High Court, will continue.  We make it  clear  that
this is subject to the condition that the appellant  herein  shall  not  ask
for any adjournment and shall cooperate  for  expeditious  disposal  of  the
petition before the High Court.
      No costs.
                                                   .......................J.
                                                           [ KURIAN JOSEPH ]


                                                   .......................J.
                                                           [A.M. KHANWILKAR]
      NEW DELHI;
      JANUARY 20, 2017.