Directorate Of Enforcement vs Satyendar Kumar Jain

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2022 Supreme(Del) 830

YOGESH KHANNA
Directorate Of Enforcement – Appellant
Versus
Satyendar Kumar Jain – Respondent

Advocates appeared:
Mr. S.V.Raju, ASG, Mr. Zoheb Hossain, Special Counsel, Mr. Vivek Gurnani, Mr. Anshuman Singh, Mr. Ankit Bhatia, Mr. Harsh Paul Singh, Advocates, with, Mr. Surender Mulik, Deputy Director and, Mr. Gaurav Saini, Asstt. Legal Adviser, for the Appellant; Dr.Abhishek Manu Singhvi, Mr. N.Hariharan, Senior Advocates with, Mr. Bhavook Chauhan, Mr. Vivek Jain, Mr. Siddharth S.Yadav, Mr. Shadan Farasat, Mr. Amit Bhandari, Ms. Tanvi Tuhina, Mr. Vivek Jain, Mr. S. Atif, Mr. Nitin Sharma, Ms. Akriti Gupta Mittal, Ms. Rekha Angara, Mr. Prateek Bhalla, Mr. Punya Lekha Angara, Mr. Tushar Yadav, Mr. Vaibhav Yadav, Mr. Mohd. Irshaad, and, Mr. Rishikesh Kumar, Advocates, for the Respondent.

ORDER

1. This petition is filed with the following prayer:-

a) Set aside the impugned direction in order dated 31.05.2022 passed by the Ld. Addl. Sessions Judge/Special Judge (PC Act), CBI-24 (MPs/MLAs Cases) RADC, New Delhi in M.No.71/2022 and 72/2022, ECIR/HQ/14/2017, in as much as the Ld. Special Court has directed at Para 26 of the impugned order that during the time of enquiry/interrogation from the accused, one Advocate of the accused shall be allowed to remain present at a safe distance where from where he can see the accused but not hear him.

2. The learned Trial Court in para 26 of the impugned order dated 31.05.2022 has noted as under:-

26. The Ld. Sr. Advocate for the accused had prayed that one counsel be assigned who shall be within visible distance of the accused but not audible distance during interrogation which was vehemently opposed by the Ld. SG. However, considering the facts and circumstances, it is directed that during the time of enquiry/interrogation from the accused one Advocate of the accused shall be allowed to remain present at a safe distance where from he can see the accused but not hear him.

3. Heard.

4. The core issue raised in the matter is - if the resp

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2022 Supreme(Del) 830

YOGESH KHANNADirectorate Of Enforcement – AppellantVersusSatyendar Kumar Jain – Respondent

Cases Referred (5)

YOGESH KHANNA
Directorate Of Enforcement – Appellant
Versus
Satyendar Kumar Jain – Respondent