The judgment emphasizes the need for judicial restraint and discipline in passing remarks against police officers and investigating agencies, highlighting the importance of exercising caution and considering ground realities and legal provisions.

JUDGMENT

Swarana Kanta Sharma, J. By way of present Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 ("Cr.P.C."), the petitioner, who is currently posted as Deputy Commissioner of Police, North East Delhi, seeks quashing and setting aside of orders dated 13.10.2022, 24.11.2022 and 07.12.2022, passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, North East, Karkardooma Courts, Delhi, in Sessions Case No. 298/2019 titled "State Vs. Sunil @ Kallu & Ors.", to the extent of observations and remarks made against the petitioner herein and also to recall and cancel the Bailable Warrants issued against the petitioner vide order dated 07.12.2022.

FACTUAL MATRIX

2. The facts and circumstances, leading to the filing of present petition, are that an FIR bearing no. 246/2019 was registered under Sections 22/29 of NDPS Act, 1985, at Police Station Khajuri Khas, wherein 5 accused persons were arrested. Chargesheet under Section 173(2) of Cr.P.C. was filed on 14.08.2019, and a supplementary report was filed on 30.10.2019 to bring on record the FSL report, which confirmed the seized contraband to be `Tramadol'. By way of another supplementary chargesheet filed on 15.09.2021, the FSL report with respect to mobile phones and SIM cards of accused persons was placed on record. During the investigation, it was felt necessary by the Investigating Agency to take voice samples of the two accused persons namely Ankit Kumar and Rupesh Kumar Gupta. Thereafter, third supplementary chargesheet dated 15.01.2022 was filed before the learned Trial Court whereby detailed report of contraband seized in the present case was placed before the learned Trial Court, and the Court was also informed that voice samples of accused would be taken on 25.01.2022. Voice samples of the accused persons were then sent to FSL, Rohini on 20.05.2022 for examination. The learned Trial Court, on 26.07.2022, directed the petitioner herein, for the first time, to make efforts to obtain the FSL Report of voice samples. On 29.07.2022, the petitioner in compliance of the said order of the learned Trial Court issued a letter, apprising the Director, FSL, Rohini, regarding order passed by the Court and requested the Director concerned to prepare the report on priority basis. On 04.10.2022, a status report was filed and these facts were placed before the learned Trial Court.

3. On 13.10.2022, vide the first order impugned before this Court, the learned Trial Court made certain remarks against the petitioner as well as the IO, SHO and ACP concerned by using terms "negligent" and "insensitive". The relevant portion of order dated 13.10.2022 is reproduced as under:

"The matter is fixed for consideration on charge and also for filing of the report of FSL regarding voice sample of accused Ankit and Rupesh, which is still pending, so, the DCP, North-East was directed to make sincere efforts to obtain the report of FLS. Copy of the last order was sent to the DCP, North East for compliance. The DCP has written a letter stating therein that DO letter was written on dated 29.07.2022, but, as this case was registered way back in the year 2019, it appears to this court that the IO/SHO/ACP/DCP are negligent persons, as, they are not making sincere efforts for obtaining the report of the FSL expeditiously. Since, accused Sunil @ Kallu and Vicky @ Harminder are in judicial custody and these police officials are insensitive enough..."

(Emphasis supplied)

4. Thereafter, on 19.10.2022, again a communication was sent by the petitioner to the Director, FSL, Rohini through Additional DCP concerned regarding filing the FSL report of voice samples. On 16.11.2022, a special messenger was also sent to FSL, Rohini to collect the result, however, the same was not ready, and thus, on 23.11.2022, the learned Trial Court was informed regarding the same.

5. On 24.11.2022, vide the second order impugned before this Court, the learned Trial court again passed re