Read Time: 06 minutes

Synopsis

CJI DY Chandrachud today directed the Sessions Judge, South 24 Parganas to decide the criminal revision petition filed by Mohammad Shami, wherein the cricketer had challenged the arrest warrant issued by the Magistrate in a case filed by his wife under Sections 498A and 354 of the Indian Penal Code, in one month's time.

The court was hearing today, Hasin Jahan, wife of Indian Cricketer Mohammad Shami's plea, assailing the judgment of the Calcutta High Court dismissing her plea for quashing the stay order passed by the Sessions Judge, South 24 Parganas in the case filed by her against Shami under Sections 498A and 354 of the Indian Penal Code. 

On May 15, while a CJI Chandrachud led bench had issued notice in the plea, the bench also comprising Justices Narasimha and Pardiwala had refused to implead Shami.

Today, the bench also comprising Justices Narasimha and Manoj Mishra, noted that after a warrant of arrest was issued against Shami in 2019, a revision was filed before the Sessions Judge against the said warrant of arrest and by an order dated 9th September, 2019, the Sessions judge had stayed all further proceedings in the said criminal case.

"Thereafter the proceedings have not been heard and the stay on trial has continued for the last four years. We find merit in the contention of the petitioner. We accordingly direct the Sessions judge to take up the criminal revision and dispose it within one month. If that is not possible, the Sessions judge will decide an application against the stay...", accordingly the CJI has ordered.

In the petition filed under Article 136, Court was told that Shami has been having illicit extra-marital relations and was engaged in sexual activities with prostitutes, while being on tour, especially during his BCCI tours, in the hotel rooms provided by the BCCI even till the present day.

The plea also raised an important concern that there shall not be any special treatment for celebrities under law.

Shami used to use his second mobile phone to manage all his affairs in relation to prostitutes and the said phone was seized by the Lal Bazaar Police, Kolkata, in connection with the present crime, the plea added.

Moreover, it is Jahan's case that while Shami had filed an application for stay of the arrest warrant issued against him by the Judicial Magistrate, the Sessions Court granted an order of stay not only against the arrest warrant but on the trial as well, which was neither prayed nor pleaded for.

Arguing that such stay in the favour of the accused person is bad in law and has caused a grave prejudice to a victim of illegal act of brutal assault and violence, the petition states that Shami has been granted a one-sided undue advantage and being treated on a special pedestal.

"Criminal Trial in the present case has been stayed for the past 4 years, without any just circumstances,..... the Ld. Sessions Court acted in an erroneous and biased manner, by virtue of which the rights and interests of the Petitioner have been severally jeopardized and prejudiced...", the plea stated.

Case Title: Hasin Jahan vs. Union of India