Anda di halaman 1dari 51

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION


SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRL.) NO.________OF 2016
[Arising out of the Impugned Judgment and Final Order
dated 29.06.2015 passed by the Hon'ble High Court of
Delhi at New Delhi in Criminal M.C.No. 2524/2015 &
Crl. M.As No. 8839/15 & 8918/15]

IN THE MATTER OF:


Ms Eera
Through Dr.Manjula Krippendorf

Petitioner

Versus
State
(Govt. of NCT of Delhi) & Anr.

Respondents

WITH
[CRL. M.P. NO.___________OF 2016]
[APPLICATION FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY
IN FILING SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION]

AND
[CRL. M.P. NO.___________OF 2016]
APPLICATION FOR EXEMPTION FROM FILING CERTIFIED
COPY OF IMPUGNED FINAL ORDER DATED 29.06.2015
PAPER BOOKS
[FOR INDEX:: KINDLY SEE INSIDE]

ADVOCATE FOR PETITIONER: MS AISHWARYA BHATI


[THROUGH SCLSC]

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

S.No.

DATE OF RECORD OF
PROCEEDINGS

PAGES

INDEX
S.NO.

PARTICULARS

1.

Office Report on Limitation

2.

Listing Proforma

3.

Synopsis and List of Dates

4.

True typed copy of the Impugned


Judgment and Final Order dated
29.06.2015 passed by the Hon'ble
High Court of Delhi at New Delhi in
Criminal M.C.No. 2524/2015 & Crl.
M.As No. 8839/15 & 8918/15.

5.

Special Leave Petition with Affidavit

6.

APPENDIX
i) Section 376 (2) (L) of IPC
ii) Section 482 of Cr.P.C

7.

ANNEXURE P-1:
True typed copy of the curriculum
vitae
of
mother
of
the
petitioner/prosecutrix dated Nil.

8.

ANNEXURE P-2:
True typed copy of the compilation of
complaints 16.07.2010
made
by
the mother of the petitioner to the
police authorities.

9.

ANNEXURE P-3:
True typed copy of the Complaint
dated 17.12.2010 submitted by the
mother of the petitioner before the
SHO, Defence Colony, New Delhi

PAGES

9.

ANNEXURE P-4:
True typed copy of the FIR No.
197/2014
dated
12.07.2014
registered by the police at Police
Station Defence Colony, New Delhi.

10.

ANNEXURE P-5:
True typed copy of the order dated
15.09.2014 passed by the Ld. Addl.
Sessions Judge, Saket Court, New
Delhi in C.C. No. 186/2014.

11.

ANNEXURE P-6:
True typed copy of the order dated
20.10.2014 passed by the Ld.
ASJ/Spl.
FTC),
Saket
Court
Complex, New Delhi in FIR No.
192/2014 registered at P.S. Defence
Colony, New Delhi

12.

ANNEXURE P-7:
True typed copy of the statement of
Dr. Roma Kumar of Sir Ganga Ram
Hospita,
New
Delhi
dated
15.05.2015 recorded by the Ld.
ASJ/Special, Fast Track Court,
Saket, New Delhi in CC No.
186/2014

13.

ANNEXURE P-8:
True typed copy of the Petition being
Crl.M.C. No. 2524/2015 dated
09.06.2015 filed by the petitioner
under Section 482 Cr.P.C. before the
Honble High Court of Delhi at New
Delhi.

14.

ANNEXURE P-9:
True typed copy of the order dated
15.06.2015 passed by the Honble
High Court of Delhi at New Delhi in
Crl.M.C.No. 2524/2015 along with
Cr. M.A. No. 8839/15 & 8918/15.

15.

Application for Condonation of delay


in filing Special Leave Petition.

16.

Application for exemption from filing


certified copy of the impugned order
dated 29.06.2015.

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA


CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRL.) NO.________OF 2016

IN THE MATTER OF:


Ms Eera
Through Dr. Manjula Krippendorf

Petitioner

Versus
State
(Govt. of NCT of Delhi) & Anr.

Respondents

OFFICE REPORT ON LIMITATION

1.

The Petition is within Limitation.

2.

The Petition is barred by time and there is delay of


_____days in filing the SLP against the Impugned
Judgment

and

Final

Order

dated

29.06.2015

passed by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi at New


Delhi in Criminal M.C.No. 2524/2015 & Crl. M.As
No.

8839/15

&

8918/15

and

petition

for

Condonation of______delay has been filed.


3.

There is delay of_______days in Re-filing the petition


and petition for Condonation of______days in refiling has been filed.
BRANCH OFFICER

NEW DELHI
DATED:

02.2016

SYNOPSIS
The present petition for Special Leave to Appeal is
directed against the Impugned Judgment and Final
Order dated 29.06.2015 passed by the Hon'ble High
Court of Delhi at New Delhi in Criminal M.C.No.
2524/2015 & Crl. M.As No. 8839/15 & 8918/15,
whereby the Honble High Court was pleased to dispose
of the Criminal M.C.No. 2524/2015 & Crl. M.As No.
8839/15 & 8918/15 of the petitioner.
It is respectfully submitted that in the present case
the petitioner who is represented by her mother Dr.
Manjula Krippendorf, who is an old lady and has given
several contributions to the health programmes of
Government of India and also served as a Commissioned
Medical Officer in the Army Medical Corps including
Combat

services

and

also

in

other

Govt.

Health

Organization.
It is respectfully submitted that the petitioner is of
38 years but she is suffering from Cerebral Palasy (R.
Hemiparesis), and a Mild-Iintellectual challenge. After the
heinous crime her communication level fell to that of a

child of 3-4 years and prior to the henious crime, she had
the developmental and communication level of 8-9 years.
It is respectfully submitted that the Accused
persons in the present matter committed a very serious
act which betrays the trust on humanity i.e. the very
serious offence under Section 376 (2) (L) of IPC with the
prosecutrix.The Accused Persons are monied people in
their locality due to which extraneous factor, they still
makes attempts to attack on the petitioner and her
mother which terrifies the prosecutrix and when any
complaint regarding the attack is made to the local
polices Station or the higher police authorities but no
mandatory step or action has been taken till date by the
police authorities concerned.

LIST OF DATES
The Petitioner is suffering from Cerebral
palsy (R Hemiparesis) and is a mildly
intellectually challenged child.
It is pertinent to mention here that
the mother of the petitioner is a eminent
and

reputed

doctor

having

great

experience in her profession who also


served in Army Hospital and many Govt.
and UN Health Organization and WHO.
She

has

assisted

in

several

health

programmes in other countries like U.K.,


Germany, New York, Nigeria etc. True
typed copy of the curriculum vitae of
mother
dated

of
Nil

the
is

petitioner/prosecutrix

annexed

herewith

and

marked as Annexure-P/1 (Page


16.07.2010

Complaint was made by the mother of the


petitioner to

the

SHO, P.S. Defence

Colony, New Delhi on attacking by a mob


of 40-60 people led by Sunil Goelalong
with

three

local

police

officers

who

attacked her mother and her younger


sisters complaint to the ACP of PS and
ACP, P.S. EOW, by the petitioner of an
attack on her and prosecutrix. True typed
copy of the compilation of complaints
16.07.2010

made by the mother of

the petitioner to the police authorities is


annexed

herewith

and

marked

as

AnnexureP/2 (Page
It is pertinent to mention here that
since 16.07.2010 to 07.07.2014, several
written complaints were forwarded from
time to time by the mother of the
proseuctrix regarding the attacks and
harassment

made

by

the

Accused

Persons on her and the prosecutrix but it


is ironical that the local police officials
even did not make any effort to protect
them in a lawful manner and no legal or
necessary action taken by local police
officials despite of informing the higher
authorities of the police department till
date and the petitioner is suffering from
dire

consequences

along

with

her

daughter but still no action has been


taken by the police authorities.

07.12.2010

On

07.12.2010,

mother

of

the

the

Complainant/

prosecutrix

filed

Complaint to the SHO, P.S. Defence


Colony, New Delhi regarding an attack by
mob of 80-100 people led by Mr. Anand
Prakash and Mr. & Mrs. A. Dawra, Sajjan
Naraayan, who smashed the proseccutrix
/victims gate, broke her ground floor of
main entrance lock, broke the MCD
sealed basement and door handle and
physically attacked her and her mother.

17.12.2010

The mother of the petitioner submitted a


Complaint/written

report

to

SHO,

Defence Colony, New Delhi regarding a


mob attack by 80 people upon her and
the prosecutrix victim led by one Anand
Prakash, Preeti Dadra and Sajjan Narain.
True copy of Complaint dated 17.12.2010
submitted by mother of the petitioner
before SHO, Defence Colony, New Delhi is

annexed

herewith

and

marked

as

Annexure P/3 (Page

09.07.2014

A zero FIR was lodged with P.S. Kotwali


City, Dehradun, Uttarakhand on the
complaint lodged by the mother of the
petitioner against the incident which
happened with the petitioner.

12.07.2014

Thereafter,

the

aforesaid

FIR

was

transferred to the police station Defence


Colony, New Delhi vide FIR No. 197/2014
against the Accused Sh. Santosh Yadav..
The Accused Shri Santosh Yadav was
arrested and upon filing the charge sheet,
the matter has been put on trial and
superficial in incomplete investigation
was started. True typed copy of the FIR
No.

197/2014

dated

12.07.2014

registered by the police at Police Station


Defence Colony, New Delhi is annexed
herewith and marked as AnnexureP/4
(Page

31.07.2014

Thereafter, Charge Sheet/final report has


been filed by the police against the
Accused Santosh Yadav for the offence
punishable under Sections 376 (2) (L) of
IPC

before

the

concerned

judicial

authority and thereafter, the case was


committed to the Ld. ASJ/Special, Fast
Track Court, Saket, New Delhi vide CC
No. 186/2014 and the same is pending
for trial. .

15.09.2014

The petitioner wishes to bring to the


notice of the Honble High Court that the
Ld. Addl. Sessions Judge, Saket, New
Delhi was pleased to pass an order qua
the

recording

of

evidence

of

the

prosecutrix/petitioner Before the Ld. Trial


Court. True typed copy of the order dated
15.09.2014 passed by the Ld. Addl.
Sessions Judge, Saket Court, New Delhi
in

C.C.

No.

186/2014

is

annexed

herewith and marked as Annexure P/5


(Page
Further, on the count of the status
of the mother of the petitioner as well as
the health condition of the petitioner, the
Ld. Trial Court was pleased to refer the
matter to the legal services authority for
providing interim compensation to the
prosecutrix/petitioner

under

the

provisions of Delhi Victim Compensation


Scheme, 2011.

20.10.2014

The Ld. Trial Court was pleased to pass


an order for submitting report by the
concerned ACP and if the prosecutrix
wishes

to

seek

police

protection/

counseling, the ACP concerned to do the


needful. And further, DLSA directed to gie
interim

compensation

for

heavy

cost

medicines. True typed copy of the order


dated 20.10.2014 passed by the Ld.
ASJ/Spl. FTC), Saket Court Complex,

New Delhi in FIR No. 192/2014 registered


at P.S. Defence Colony, New Delhi is
annexed

herewith

and

marked

as

Annexure-P/6 (page
It is pertinent to mention here that
the Ld. ASJ specifically observed that
Application

moved

on

behalf

of

the

mother of prosecutrix stating inter alia


that she has been raped by the Accused
and despite being a silent sufferer, has
been terrorized by some occupants of the
same

building

their

names

being

mentioned in the Application. On the


same day, concerned ACP was directed to
file a report in this regard and also
directed that meanwhile if the prosecutrix
wishes

to

seek

police

counseling etc., the ACP

protection,
concerned do

the needful and the copy of this order


was also sent to the ACP concerned.

14.11.2014

On

14.11.2014,

the

petitioner

was

hospitalized on the date fixed by the Ld.


Trial

Court,

and

an

exemption

was

sought and the same was granted by the


Ld. Trial Court. The matter was thereafter
adjourned for 19 /20.12.2014.
Further, the Ld. Trial Court ASJ was
transferred by an administrative order to
Rohini Courts, Delhi and the matter was
adjourned to 12/13.02.2015.

12.02.2015

On 12.02.2015, P.W. Narender Singh and


Head Constable Subhash Chand were
present for further examination.

30.03.2015

The mother of the petitioner who was


present was not examined as the Ld. Trial
Court felt that the petitioner/ prosecutrix
was to be examined first. However, as the
petitioner was hospitalized the matter
was adjourned for 31.03.2015. The I.O.
was further directed to comply with the

order dated 15.09.2014 passed by the


Predecessor of the Ld. Trial Court.

31.03.2015

An Application was moved by the mother


of the petitioner indicating that the order
dated 20.10.2014 was not being complied
with, in relation to providing security for
the prosecutrix/ petitioner. However, the
case

was

further

adjourned

for

15.05.2015 & 18.05.2015.


15.05.2015

The petitioner was produced by her


mother and was also accompanied by Dr.
(Mrs.)

Roma

Kumar,

Sr.

Consultant

(Psychologist), Ganga Ram Hospital and


Max Hospital, Gurgaon for interpretation
in which she stated that she knows the
prosecutrix since 1987 and suffering from
cerebral palsy. True typed copy of the
statement of Dr. Roma of Sir Ganga Ram
Hospita, New Delhi dated 15.05.2015
recorded by the Ld. ASJ/Special, Fast
Track Court, Saket, New Delhi in CC No.

186/2014

is

annexed

herewith

and

marked as AnnexureP/7(Page
Thereafter the version of I.O. was
recorded. Further, th3 mother of the
petitioner also pointed out the order
passed by the Ld. Predecessor dated
15.09.2014

wherein

it

has

been

categorically recorded that in Camera


Trial for recording of the statement of the
prosecutrix would be video graphed but
despite pointing out the said facts, the
Ld. Trial Court proceeded in a arbitrary
manner on its own way for recording of
the evidence of the prosecurtix, which
finds

mentioned

in

order

dated

15.05.2015. Further, after putting a lot of


efforts were made to do in Camera
Recording the evidence of the prosecutrix
in a vulnerable room at Saket Court
Complex, New Delhi in which prosecutrix
did make a coherent statement in child
like language of the anatomical part of

the

accused

that

was

put

in

her.

However, the trial judge refused to accept


the child like language, despite the fact
that the interpreter Dr. Roma Kumar was
interpreting the child like language for
the

trial

judge

thereafter

and

the

adjourned

case

was

because

the

prosecutrix was distressed and crying


instead the trial judge adjourned the inCamera

Trial

because

repeated

questioning in the same was making the


child cry and distressed. Thereafter, the
matter

was

listed

for

21.05.2015

&

27.05.2015 and the I.O. was directed to


collect

the

relevant

AADI

and

submit

information
the

report

from
on

18.05.2016 at 4.00 p.m.


15.05.2015

The mother of the petitioner had brought


an expert for doing the video graphy of
the proceedings, the concerned officials of
vulnerable witness Court room of the

Saket Court Complex submitted that the


video graphy of the proceeding was not
permissible.

21.05.2015

Ms. G. Shyamla Executive Director AADI,


the NGO Action For Ability Development
and Inclusion, appeared before the Ld.
Trial Court along with the I.O. it is
submitted that on the query of the Ld.
Trial Court,

mother of the petitioner

stated that prosecutrix/ petitioner has


been going to AIIMS Hospital at Neuro
Science Department and she was under
treatment

of

Professor

Sagar,

Psychological Department and Dr. (Mrs.)


Nehra, Neuropsychology Department and
as such Ms. G. Shyamla suggested that
they would be better special educator,
interpreters in the matter.
27.05.2015

Dr. (Mrs.) Nehra and Dr. Sagar were on


vacation and further as the mother of the
petitioner as also not present, the matte

was deferred for 2nd July 2015 for the


evidence of the mother of the prosecutrix
and Dr. Veena from Dehradun Hospital
on 03.06.2015 for the evidence of the
petitioner/ prosecutrix.
Further, the proceeding recorded on
15.05.2015 has not been recorded as per
the

order

already

passed

by

the

Predecessor of this Ld. Trial Court dated


15.09.2015.
Further, the petitioner submits that
the proceedings are not being conducted
by the present Presiding Officer in the
congenial manner and as provided by
law.

09.06.2015

The prosecutrix through her mother filed


a Petition being Crl.M.C.No. 2524/2015
along with Cr. M.A. No. 8839/15 &
8918/15 before the Honble High Court of
Delhi at New Delhi under Section 482 of
Cr.P.C. with the following prayers:

a)

The matter be transferred to Special

Court

under

POCSO

Act,

since

the

functional age of the child is 3-4 years.


b)

The evidence of the prosecutrix/

petitioner may kindly be recorded in the


most

congenial

and

comfortable

atmosphere and the proceedings may


kindly be video graphed and the same
may be recorded before any lady Joint
Registrar of the Honble High Court.
c)

To permit the petitioner to avail the

services of Dr. (Mrs.) Nehra of All India


Institute of Medical Sciences and Dr.
(Mrs.)

Roma

Kumar,

Sr.

Consultant

(Psychologist) presently working with Max


Hospital for recording the evidence of the
petitioner.
d)
of

to grant permission for video graphy


the

entire

on

such

terms

and

conditions as tis Honble Court may deem


fit.

e)

Supervision of the present case be

transferred from P.S. Defence Colony to


any other branch such as crime.
f)

pass such other order or direction,

as the Honble Court may deem fit.

True typed copy of the Petition being


Crl.M.C.No. 2524/2015 dated 09.06.2015
filed by the petitioner under Section 482
Cr.P.C. before the Honble High Court of
Delhi at New Delhi is annexed herewith
and marked as Annexure P/8 (Page

15.06.2015

The Honble High Court of Delhi was


pleased to pass the directions for making
necessary arrangements for video graphy
of the proceedings as the proseuctrix most
communicate

through

Gestures.

True

typed copy of the order dated 15.06.2015


passed

by

Delhi at

the
New

Honble High Court of


Delhi in

Crl. M. C.

No.

2524/2015 along with Cr. M.A. No.

8839/15 & 8918/15 is annexed herewith


and marked as Annexure P/9(Page
29.06.2015

Vide

impugned

final

order

dated

29.06.2015, the Honble High Court was


pleased to dispose of the Criminal Crl.
M.C.No. 2524/2015 & Crl. M.As No.
8839/15

&

8918/15

of

petitioner.[IMPUGNED ORDER)

02.2016

Hence, this Special Leave Petition.

the

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA


Order XXI Rule 3 (1) (a)
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRL.) NO._______OF 2016
[WITH PRAYER FOR INTERIM RELIEF]
POSITION OF PARTIES
In Trial In High
In this
Court
Court
Court
BETWEEN:
Ms Eera
Through Dr. Manjula
Krippendorf1,Mother
&Natural Guardian
B-56, Defence Colony,
New Delhi.

Accused

Appellant Petitioner

VERSUS
1.

2.

State
(Govt. of NCT of Delhi)
Thr. Principal Home Secretary
A-Wing, 5th Floor,
Delhi Secretariat,
New Delhi-110003.
ProseRespondent
Cution
No. 1
Santosh Kumar Yadav,
Lodged in Central Jail,
Tihar, New Delhi.
Accused

Respondent
No. 2

TO
THE HONBLE CHIEF JUSTICE OF INDIA
AND HIS COMPANION JUDGES OF THE

Respondent
No.1

Respondent
No.2

HONBLE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA


NEWDELHI.
THE HUMBLE PETITION OF THE
PETITIONER ABOVE NAMED
MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH:
1.

This is a petition for Special Leave to Appeal under


Article 136 of the Constitution of India filed by the
petitioner, which is directed against theImpugned
Judgment

and

Final

Order

dated

29.06.2015

passed by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi at New


Delhi in Criminal M.C.No. 2524/2015 & Crl. M.As
No. 8839/15 & 8918/15, whereby the Honble High
Court was pleased to dispose of the Criminal
M.C.No. 2524/2015 & Crl. M.As No. 8839/15 &
8918/15 of the petitioner.

2.

QUESTIONS OF LAW:
The

following

questions

of

law

arise

for

consideration by this Honble Court

i)

Whether the judgment/ final order passed by the


both the Ld. courts below is not sustainable in the
eyes of law as while passing the impugned order the
Honble High Court ignored the prayer regarding

that the matter be transferred to the Special Court


established under POCSO Act since the functional
age of the prosecutrix / child is 3 to 4 years and the
other prayer that the supervision / investigation of
the present case can be transferred from PS.
Defence Colony to any other branch such as Crime
?

ii)

Whether the Honble High Court was justified in not


appreciating the fact that in the present case the
prosecutrix is represented by her mother. The
prosecutrix is a child with cerebral palasy (R
Hamiparesis) and a mild intellectual challenge with
I.Q. 90, functioning at 8-10 years levels per the Dr.
opinion, while her chronological age is 38 years.
However after the heinous crime her functional and
communication level fell due to the trauma of
heinous crime to that of a child of 3-4 years level. It
clearly shows that the developmental level of the
prosecutrix is declining day by day as she has no
adequate treatment and care following the crime.
Therefore, the prosecutrix should be treated as a

child with special care and attention, vital for her


survival. In view of her present functional age of 3-4
years following the heinous crime and her previous
functional

age

of

8-10

years,

the

matter

be

transferred to the Special Court established under


POCSO Act as she remains a child in the interest of
justice ?

iii)

Whether the Honble High Court was justified in not


appreciating

the

fact

that

since

2010,

the

prosecutrix and her mother have been facing dire


consequences

regarding

the

attacks

and

harassment, encroachment, house trespass etc.


regarding which several complaints and efforts were
made by the mother of the petitioner regarding the
safety

and

security

of

her

and

her

daughter/prosecutrix but no necessary steps have


been taken yet by the police officials despite of
approaching higher police authorities ?

iv)

Whether the Honble High Court was justified in not


appreciating the fact that the prosecutrix has been
suffering from Post Traumatic stress syndrome

which

affected

the

health

and

mind

of

the

prosecutrix and she has only her mother who is a


old lady to take care of her. In such circumstances
also, the attempts of attacks on the prosecutrix and
her mother has been continuously made by the
Accused persons and when the mother of the
petitioner approached the police station they neither
registered an FIR nor taken any mandatory or
necessary action in this regard ?

v)

Whether the Honble High Court was justified in not


appreciating

the

fact

that

in

such

type

of

consequences, the investigation of the present case


should be transferred from P.S. Defence Colony to
any other branch such as Crime for the safety and
security of the prosecutrix and her mother for fair
investigation in the interest of justice?

vi)

Whether the Honble High Court was justified in not


appreciating the fact that in the present the list of
attacks and the time to time intimation of the same
by the mother of the petitioner to the police
authorities clearly shows that the local police has

hand and gloves with the accused persons and the


goons which are simultaneously made attempts to
attack on the prosecutrix and her mother?

3.

DECLARATION IN TERMS OF RULE 2 (2):


The Petitioner states that no other petition seeking
leave to appeal has been filed by her against the
Impugned

Judgment

and

Final

Order

dated

29.06.2015 passed by the Hon'ble High Court of


Delhi at New Delhi in Criminal M.C.No. 2524/2015
& Crl. M.As No. 8839/15 & 8918/15.

4.

DECLARATION IN TERMS OF RULE 4:


The Annexure P/1 to P/8 produced along with the
S.L.P.

are

true

pleadings/documents,

typed
which

copy
form

part

of

the
of

the

records of the case in the court below against whose


order the leave to appeal is sought for in this
petition.

5.

GROUNDS

A.

It is respectfully submitted that judgment/ final


order passed by the both the Ld. courts below is not
sustainable in the eyes of law as while passing the
impugned order the Honble High Court ignored the
prayer regarding that the matter be transferred to
the Special Court established under POCSO Act
since the functional age of the prosecutrix / child is
3 to 4 years and the other prayer that the
supervision / investigation of the present case can
be transferred from PS. Defence Colony to any other
branch such as Crime.

B.

It is respectfully submitted that in the present case


the prosecutrix is represented by her mother. The
prosecutrix is a child with cerebral palasy (R
Hamiparesis) and a mild intellectual challenge,
functioning at 8-10 years levels per the Dr. opinion,
while her chronological age is 38 years. However
after

the

heinous

crime

her

functional

and

communication level fell due to the trauma of


heinous crime to that of a child of 3-4 years level. It
clearly shows that the developmental level of the

prosecutrix is declining day by day as she has no


adequate treatment following the crime. Therefore,
the prosecutrix should be treated as a child with
special care and attention, vital for her survival. In
view of her present functional age of 3-4 years
following the heinous crime and her previous
functional

age

of

8-10

years,

the

matter

be

transferred to the Special Court established under


POCSO Act as she remains a child in the interest of
justice.

C.

It is respectfully submitted that since 2010, the


prosecutrix and her mother have been facing dire
consequences

regarding

the

attacks

and

harassment, encroachment, house trespass etc.


regarding which several complaints and efforts were
made by the mother of the petitioner regarding the
safety

and

security

of

her

and

her

daughter/prosecutrix but no necessary steps have


been taken yet by the police officials despite of
approaching higher police authorities.

D.

It is respectfully submitted that the prosecutrix has


been suffering from Post Traumatic stress syndrome
which

effected

the

health

and

mind

of

the

prosecutrix and she has only her mother who is a


old lady to take care of her. In such circumstances
also, the attempts of attacks on the prosecutrix and
her mother has been continuously made by the
Accused persons and when the mother of the
petitioner approached the police station they neither
registered an FIR nor taken any mandatory or
necessary action in this regard.

E.

It is respectfully submitted that in such type of


consequences, the investigation of the present case
should be transferred from P.S. Defence Colony to
any other branch such as Crime for the safety and
security of the prosecutrix and her mother for fair
investigation in the interest of justice.

F.

It is respectfully submitted that in the present the


list of attacks and the time to time intimation of the
same by the mother of the petitioner to the police
authorities clearly shows that the local police has

hand and gloves with the accused persons and the


goons which are simultaneously made attempts to
attack on the prosecutrix and her mother.

6.

GROUNDS FOR INTERIM RELIEF:It is respectfully submitted that the Petitioner has
prima facie case as disclosed in the foregoing
paragraphs

and

the

petitioner

would

suffer

irreparable loss and injuries, her mother and the


prosecutrix are not safe and their personal safety
and security is at stake if the following two prayers
i.e. (a) & (e) as mentioned in the list of dates are not
allowed by this Honble Court, which are as follows:
:
a)

The matter be transferred to Special Court


under POCSO Act, since the functional age of
the child is 3-4 years.

e)

Supervision of the present case be transferred


from P.S. Defence Colony to any other branch
such as crime.

during the pendency of the present Special Leave


Petition. The balance of convenience is in favour of

the petitioner and it is a prima facie case for


allowing the above mentioned prayers.

MAIN PRAYER:

7.

It is therefore, most respectfully prayed that your


lordships may be pleased to:
a.

Grant the Special Leave to Appeal against the


Impugned

Judgment

and

Final

Order

dated

29.06.2015 passed by the Hon'ble High Court of


Delhi at New Delhi in Criminal M.C.No. 2524/2015
& Crl. M.As No. 8839/15 & 8918/15,in the interest
of justice;
AND/OR
b.

Pass such other order or orders, as this Honble


Court may deem fit and proper.

PRAYER FOR INTERIM RELIEF:

8.

It is therefore, humbly prayed that this Honble


Court may graciously be pleased to;
i)

Allow following two prayers i.e. (a) & (e) as


mentioned in the list of dates by this Honble
Court, which are as follows :

a)

The matter be transferred to Special


Court

under

POCSO

Act,

since

the

functional age of the child is 3-4 years.


e)

Supervision

of

the

present

case

be

transferred from P.S. Defence Colony to


any other branch such as crime.
during the pendency of the present Special Leave
Petition. in the interest of justice;
AND/ OR
ii)

Pass such other order or orders, as this Honble


Court may deem fit and proper.

AND FOR THIS ACT OF KINDNESS, THE PETITIONER


SHALL EVER PRAY

DRAWN & FILED BY

MS AISHWARYA BHATI
ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER
DRAWN ON:
FILED ON

02.2016
02.2016

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA


CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRL.) NO._______OF 2016
IN THE MATTER OF:
Ms Eera
Through Dr. Manjula Krippendorf

Petitioner

Versus
State
(Govt. of NCT of Delhi) & Anr.

Respondents

CERTIFICATE
Certified that the Special leave Petition is confined only to
the pleading before the Court whose order is challenged
and

the

other

documents

relied

upon

in

those

proceedings. No additional facts, documents or grounds


have been taken therein or relied upon in the Special
leave Petition. It is further certified that the copies of the
documents/Annexures attached to the Special Leave
Petition are necessary to answer the question of law
raised in the petition or to make out grounds urged in
the Special leave Petition for consideration of this Honble
Court.

This certificate is given on the basis of the

instructions given by the petitioner/person authorized by


the petitioner whose affidavit is filed in support of the
Special Leave Petition.

DRAWN & FILED BY:


DRAWN ON:

02.2016

FILED ON:

02.2016
MS AISHWARYA BHATI
ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA


CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRL.M.P. NO. ___________OF 2016
IN
SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRL.) NO.________OF 2016
IN THE MATTER OF:
Ms Eera
Through Dr. Manjula Krippendorf

Petitioner

Versus
State
(Govt. of NCT of Delhi) & Anr.

Respondents

APPLICATION FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY


IN FILING THE SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION
TO
THE HONBLE CHIEF JUSTICE OF INDIA
AND HIS COMPANION JUSTICES OF THE
HONBLE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
THE HUMBLE PETITION OF THE
PETITIONER ABOVE-NAMED

MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH:


1.

That this is an Application for condonation of delay


in filing the Special Leave Petition filed by the
petitioner along with accompanying SLP, which is
directed against the Impugned Judgment and Final
Order dated 29.06.2015 passed by the Hon'ble High

Court of Delhi at New Delhi in Criminal M.C.No.


2524/2015 & Crl. M.As No. 8839/15 & 8918/15.

2.

That the facts stated in the Special Leave Petition


may be read as part and parcel of this Application
as the same not repeated herein for the sake of
brevity. The petitioner craves the indulgence of this
Hon'ble Court to allow her to refer and rely on the
same at the time of hearing of this application.

3.

It is respectfully submitted that the present SLP has


been filed through SCLSC and the cause of delay is
on

account of

the

reasons

mentioned

across

following dates.
a)

Date of assignment of the counsel

13.01.2016

b)

Case File received by the Counsel.

15.01.2016

c)

The matter was under drafting.

01.02.2016

d)

Affidavit

16.02.2016

02.2016

of

the

petitioner

were

received.
e)

SLP was finally prepared and filed.

4.

All this has resulted in substantial delay, which is


neither

intentional

nor

deliberate

and

hence

deserves to be condoned in the interest of justice.

5.

It is respectfully submitted that if the delay in filing


the accompanying S.L.P. is not condoned by this
Honble

Court,

irreparable

the

loss,

petitioner

hardship,

would

injuries

and

suffer
great

injustice, which cannot be compensated in any


manner.
PRAYER

It is, therefore, humbly prayed that your Lordships


may graciously be pleased to;
(a)

condone the delay of_______days in filing the


Special Leave Petition against the Impugned
Judgment and Final Order dated 29.06.2015
passed by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi at
New Delhi in Criminal M.C.No. 2524/2015 &
Crl. M.As No. 8839/15 & 8918/15, in the
interest of justice.
AND/OR

b)

pass such and other order (s) as this Hon'ble


Court may deem just and proper in the facts
and circumstances of the case.

AND FOR THIS ACT OF KINDNESS PETITIONER IN


THEIR DUTY BOUND SHALL EVER PRAY.

DRAWN & FILED BY:

MS AISHWARYA BHATI
ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER
DRAWN ON:
FILED ON:

02.2016
02.2016

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA


CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRL. M.P. NO.___________OF 2016
IN
SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRL.) NO.________OF 2016

IN THE MATTER OF:


Ms Eera
Through Dr. Manjula Krippendorf

Petitioner

Versus
State
(Govt. of NCT of Delhi) & Anr.

Respondents

APPLICATION FOR FROM FILING CERTIFIED


COPY OF THE IMPUGNED FINAL JUDGMENT
AND ORDER DATED 29.06.2015

TO
THE HONBLE CHIEF JUSTICE OF INDIA
AND HIS COMPANION JUSTICES OF THE
HONBLE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
THE HUMBLE PETITION OF THE
PETITIONER ABOVE-NAMED
MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH:
1.

That this is an Application for from filing certified


copy of the impugned final judgment and order
dated 29.06.2015 filed by the petitioner along with
accompanying the Special Leave Petition which is

directed against the Impugned Judgment and Final


Order dated 29.06.2015 passed by the Hon'ble High
Court of Delhi at New Delhi in Criminal M.C.No.
2524/2015 & Crl. M.As No. 8839/15 & 8918/15.

2.

It is respectfully submitted that the certified copy of


the impugned final order dated 29.06.2015 is not
available with the petitioner at this stage but she
has applied for the same. However, due to the
urgency in the matter, the petitioner filed true typed
copy of the same as the petitioner is a minor and is
represented through her mother and the present
SLP filed by the petitioner through SCLSC and the
original case file was received by the Counsel
without certified copy of the final impugned order.

3.

Therefore, in view of the above submissions, the


petitioner is seeking exemption from filing certified
copy of the impugned final order dated 29.06.2015
and this Honble Court exempts the petitioner from
filing certified copy of the impugned final order in
the interest of justice.

4.

The balance of convenience is in favour of the


petitioner.

PRAYER

It is, therefore, humbly prayed that your Lordships


may graciously be pleased to;
(b)

Exempt the petitioner from filing certified copy


of the final impugned judgment and order
dated 29.06.2015, in the interest of justice.
AND/OR

b)

pass such and other order (s) as this Hon'ble


Court may deem just and proper in the facts
and circumstances of the case.

AND FOR THIS ACT OF KINDNESS PETITIONER IN


THEIR DUTY BOUND SHALL EVER PRAY.

DRAWN & FILED BY:

MS AISHWARYA BHATI
ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER
DRAWN ON:

02.2016

FILED ON:

02.2016

IN THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF DELHI


AT NEW DELHI
Criminal M.C.No. 2524/2015
MEMO OF PARTIES
BETWEEN:
Ms Eera
Through Dr. Manjula
Krippendorf Mother
& Natural Guardian
B-56, Defence Colony,
New Delhi.

Petitioner
VERSUS

1.

State
Through Standing Counsel
426, Lawyers Chambers,
Delhi High Court, New Delhi.

2.

Santosh Kumar Yadav,


Lodged in Central Jail,
Tihar, New Delhi.

Respondents

DRAWN & FILED BY:

MS AISHWARYA BHATI
ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER
DRAWN ON:
FILED ON:

92.2016
02.2016

IN THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF DELHI


AT NEW DELHI
Crl. M.As No. 8839/15
MEMO OF PARTIES
BETWEEN:
Ms Eera
Through Dr. Manjula
Krippendorf Mother
& Natural Guardian
B-56, Defence Colony,
New Delhi.

Petitioner
VERSUS

1.

State
Through Standing Counsel
426, Lawyers Chambers,
Delhi High Court, New Delhi.

2.

Santosh Kumar Yadav,


Lodged in Central Jail,
Tihar, New Delhi.

Respondents

DRAWN & FILED BY:

MS AISHWARYA BHATI
ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER
DRAWN ON:
FILED ON:

92.2016
02.2016

IN THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF DELHI


AT NEW DELHI
Crl. M.As No. 8918/15.
MEMO OF PARTIES
BETWEEN:
Ms Eera
Through Dr. Manjula
Krippendorf Mother
& Natural Guardian
B-56, Defence Colony,
New Delhi.

Petitioner
VERSUS

1.

State
Through Standing Counsel
426, Lawyers Chambers,
Delhi High Court, New Delhi.

2.

Santosh Kumar Yadav,


Lodged in Central Jail,
Tihar, New Delhi.

Respondents

DRAWN & FILED BY:

MS AISHWARYA BHATI
ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER
DRAWN ON:
FILED ON:

92.2016
02.2016

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA


CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRL.) NO.________OF 2016

IN THE MATTER OF:


Ms Eera
Through Dr. Manjula Krippendorf

Petitioner

Versus
State
(Govt. of NCT of Delhi) & Anr.

Respondents

AFFIDAVIT
I, Dr. Manjula Krippendorf, R/o House No. B-56, Defence
Colony, New Delhi, do hereby solemnly affirm and declare
as under:

1.

That I am the mother of the petitioner in the


aforesaid matter and as such I am well conversant
with the facts and circumstances of the case, hence
I am competent to swear and sign this affidavit.

2.

That the accompanying Special Leave Petition


containing Paras from 1 to 8, Pages from
and List of Dates from

to

to

& I.As. have been

drafted as per my instruction by our counsel


through SCLSC and I have gone through the
contents thereof and I understood the same.

3.

That the Annexures enclosed with the SLP are true


typed copies of their respective originals.

4.

That

the

contents

of

the

aforesaid

SLP

and

Applications are true and correct to the best of my


knowledge and belief and nothing material has been
concealed therefrom.

DEPONENT
VERIFICATION:
Verified at New Delhi on this_______day of February,
2016 that the contents of the aforesaid affidavit are true
and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief, no
part of it is false and no material has been concealed
therefrom.

DEPONENT