$~1 & 2 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.A. 748/2002 DINESH GARG .....Appellant Through: Ms. Vivya Nagpal, Mr. Ekansh Bansal, Ms. Osheen Jain and Mr.

Priyanshu Kumar, Advocates.

versus C.B.I. .....Respondent Through: Mr. Atul Guleria, SPP with Mr. Aryan Rakesh and Ms. Atreyi Chatterjee, Advocates.

+ CRL.A. 763/2002 V.K. DATTA .....Appellant Through: Mr. Abhishek and Mr. Ankit Rana, Advocates.

versus NCT OF DELHI .....Respondent Through: Mr. Atul Guleria, SPP with Mr. Aryan Rakesh and Ms. Atreyi Chatterjee, Advocates. CORAM: O R D E R % 09.02.2026

1. On the last date of hearing, i.e., 16.12.2025, the matter was adjourned on a request made on behalf of the appellants.

2. Today, in the morning, when the case was taken up, the learned counsel for the appellant in CRL.A. 763/2002 sought an adjournment on the ground that the main counsel had undergone a knee surgery.

3. It was made clear that CRL.A. 763/2002 would not be taken up. However, CRL.A. 748/2002 was directed to be taken up and the matter was passed over to 02:30 P.M., as the counsel was not present at that time.

4. When the matter was taken up at 02:30 P.M., Advocate Ms.

Vivya Nagpal submits that the arguing counsel Advocate Mr. Satish Chandra is indisposed and therefore, he is unable to argue the matter.

5. It is seen that the appellants for one reason or the other is not getting ready for arguments despite the fact that the appeal pertains to year 2002.

6. Since the counsel who has to argue in CRL.A. 748/2002 is not present and Advocate Mr. Abhishek seeks an adjournment, this Court is constrained to adjourn the matter despite the fact that the appeal pertains to year 2002.

7. List the matter for hearing on 23.03.2026.

FEBRUARY 9, 2026/rs