Shraddha Walkar murder case: Saket Court rejects objection to Aaftab Poonawala's courtroom seating

Saket Court on Wednesday rejected the protest marked by the Complainants counsel over the sitting of accused Aaftab Amin Poonawala adjacent to or next to the advocates deskDuring the recording of the prosecution evidence Advocate Seema Samridhi Kushwaha raised the objection that the accused was sitting next to the advocates deskThe court said that the Apex Court has repeatedly held that neither can the accused be denied proper seating in the courtroomThe court passed a detailed order rejecting the protest and noted that the said protest was rejected earlier alsoThe court said that in our country there is a presumption of innocence and every accused has a right to a fair trialThe court also said the accused must be seated near his counsel for the ease of communication and for smooth functioning of the courtAdditional Sessions Judge ASJ Hargurvarinder Singh Jaggi said As a matter of abundant caution for convenience and smooth conduct of the Court proceedings the accused Aaftab Amin Poonawala was permitted to sit adjacent right behind his counsel Ms Megha SaroaThe Honorable High Court of Delhi on 06052009 introduced Rule 14 at the end of Chapter 1 Part A of the Delhi High Court Rules and Orders Volume 3 Rule 14 states that the Accused is to be permitted to sit during the trial said ASJ JaggiThe court also said that the Court has also dealt on prior occasion that be it the accused no matter how grievous and heinous the offence he also has rights and the Apex Court has repeatedly held that neither the accused can be denied a proper seating in the courtroom nor a treatment which may reek of disgust vengeanceThe court also said that above all the hallmarks of criminal jurisprudence of our country are the presumption of innocence and an accused also has a right to a fair trialThe right to fair trial inherently includes the right and access to counsel Article 221 of the Constitution of India 1950 and multiple legal provisions enshrined in the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 CrPC Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023BNSS protect the accuseds right to be defended by a legal practitioner of choice This may at times require the accused sitting close enough to communicate to their counsel said ASJ JaggiDuring the recording of the evidence Inspector Sandeep Kumar advocate Seema Kushwaha the counsel for the complainant Shreejay Vikas Walker brother of the deceased lodged her protest that the accused Aaftab Amin Poonawala Aaftab will not sit adjacent or next to the Advocates deskThe Court declined the unwarranted and unreasonable request by the learned counsel for the complainantThe court has listed the matter for further examination and crossexamination on July 27 The court has called the investigation officer Ram Singh for recording of evidence on July 23Delhi police has moved an application seeking permission to record the evidence of witnesses through Video conferencing under the Electronic Evidence and VC Rules 2025 of the High Court of DelhiThese Witnesses are the Nodal Officer of WhatsApp and Meta Platform Inc Adrian Silvera the Nodal Officer of Google LLC Shelby Smith the Nodal Officer of Google Gmail Arti Sheth Nodal Officer of Bumble Luke Mitsi All these Witnesses are situated outside IndiaAt the request of counsel for the accused the court granted two days to file a reply on the application This application will be heard on July 24Saket Court is recording Prosecution evidence on a daytoday basisThis story has been sourced from a third party syndicated feed agencies Midday accepts no responsibility or liability for its dependability trustworthiness reliability and data of the text Midday managementmiddaycom reserves the sole right to alter delete or remove without notice the content in its absolute discretion for any reason whatsoever