NDMC officer murder case: Deceased officer's wife moves High Court seeking appointment of special public prosecutor

New Delhi [India], December 22 : The widow of NDMC Estate officer Mohd. Moin Khan has approached the Delhi High Court seeking direction for the appointment of a special public prosecutor (SPP).
Earlier SPP was appointed by the LG but later on, he stopped appearing in the matter. Khan was shot dead near his house in the Jamia Nagar area on May 16, 2016.
The Counsel for Delhi Government on Thursday submitted before the bench of justice Yogesh Khanna that it will take 1-2 months time to appoint an SPP. Meanwhile, the additional public prosecutor (APP) will represent the State.
Justice Khanna has listed the matter on February 21, 2023, for further hearing in the matter.
Advocate Anand Mishra and Vandita Nain, Counsel for the petitioner argued that the State has taken things too lightly for an officer who was murdered for denying bribes.
The counsels submitted that the earlier SPP had stopped appearing in the matter one and half years back. They also submitted that the director of the prosecution has directed the regular APP to represent the State.
It is also stated in the petition that the Lieutenant Governor (LG) of Delhi had appointed an SPP to conduct a trial of the matter to the exclusion of all other prosecutors. However, with the passage of time, the SPP had stopped appearing in the matter on the pretext of some dispute arising between him and the respondents relating to the payment of his fee, which delayed the trial of the matter.
It is also submitted that the petitioner had approached the High Court earlier too by filing a petition in 2021 seeking direction to them to reconcile their disputes so that the trial in the matter does not suffer and can proceed smoothly.
It is also submitted that the respondents arbitrarily without assigning any reason and illegally overriding the order of the LG have instructed the APP of the trial court to conduct the trial in the matter instead of a special public prosecutor.
It is also said that the trial court also allowed such arbitrary action to be done and did not even direct them to provide a copy of such order, notification, if any, neither to the court nor to the petitioner so as to know the credibility of the action, which is eclipsed by arbitrariness and illegality on the part of respondents.
The bench of justice Mukta Gupta had noted its order dated March 23, 2021, that as per the said affidavit (of DCP), earlier the bills of SPP were being cleared however when the pending bills of 8,83,300 were sent to the Pay & Accounts office for payment, an objection was raised, that is, "Rate duly approved by the competent authority may be provided".
On perusal of the records, it was revealed that the fee structure of the learned SPP had not been approved and the SPP was not in a position to provide the approved fee structure, the court had noted.
Consequently, the rate fee for the appearance has been sought from the learned Spl. P.P. who has assured that the same will be given soon so that necessary approvals in this regard are taken.
The affidavit of the DCP also encloses a letter dated 22 March 2021 sent by the SPP assuring that he will continue to represent the State/prosecution in the above-noted case before the Court of law and shall not stop appearing on account of non-payment or delay in clearance of the professional fee, the court had noted.

The petitioner submitted that her husband, prior to his death, was dealing with the recovery matter pertaining to the recovery of a huge amount of licence fees of Hotel Connaught. She also alleged that Ramesh Kakkar (one of the accused persons), MD of Hotel Connaught in conspiracy with other accused had allegedly committed the offence of murder of the husband of the petitioner on 16.05.2016 by shooting him as he refused to accept bribes and the illegal demands of the accused persons.
An FIR was registered at police station Jamia Nagar under sections 302, 120B, 201, 411, 34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and Sections 25 & 27 of the Arms Act. A Charge sheet was filed by Delhi Police and the case is at the stage of prosecution evidence in Saket Court.
On the other hand, accused Ramesh Kakkar sought regular bail on the ground of his ailment and delay in the trial. His counsel submitted that the trial will take too long to be completed. In this circumstance, he may be released on bail.
The bench has listed his matter before the vacation bench on December 28.