Delhi High Court

Delhi HC Orders Review of Sukesh Chandrasekhar’s Petition for More Legal Meetings

FacebookFacebookTwitterTwitterEmailEmailWhatsAppWhatsAppLinkedInLinkedInShareShare

The Delhi High Court on Tuesday (August 19) directed Tihar jail authorities to consider a writ petition filed by alleged conman Sukesh Chandrasekhar as a representation and make a decision.

Chandrasekhar is seeking additional opportunities to meet with his lawyers while in custody.

Justice Amit Mahajan was hearing the matter.

It is to be noted that previosuly, Justice Subramonium Prasad had recused himself from hearing the case.

Chandrasekhar’s plea requested permission to increase his meetings with his lawyers to five times a week, an additional three meetings beyond the two currently allowed per week.

Representing Chandrasekhar, Advocate Anant Malik stated that the petitioner, an undertrial prisoner involved in numerous cases across different jurisdictions, finds the current allowance of virtual meetings insufficient. Given the complexity and breadth of his legal issues, including high-profile corruption and extortion cases, Chandrasekhar argues that more frequent consultations with his lawyers are crucial for effectively managing his defense.

Furthermore, the plea highlights Chandrasekhar’s personal difficulties, including isolation from his family due to distance and the incarceration of his spouse. This situation increases his distress, underscoring the need for regular and meaningful interactions with his legal counsel. The petition also claims that the current restrictions on legal consultations violate Chandrasekhar’s fundamental rights under Article 22(1) of the Constitution of India, which guarantees the right to consult and be defended by a legal practitioner of one’s choice.

In order to support his request, Chandrasekhar’s petition references recent judicial precedents, including the Delhi High Court’s decision in Arvind Kejriwal vs. Department of Delhi Prisons. In that case, the court granted the accused five weekly meetings with their counsel, reinforcing the argument that similar allowances should be made for Chandrasekhar to ensure adequate legal representation.

Read More: Supreme Court, Delhi High Court, States High Court, International

Nunnem Gangte

Recent Posts

Gulmarg Fashion Show: Srinagar Court To Hear Case Against Organizers On April 8

A Srinagar court has scheduled a hearing for April 8, 2025, in connection with the…

8 hours ago

Gold Smuggling Case: Kannada Actress Ranya Rao Moves Sessions Court For Bail

Kannada actress Ranya Rao, arrested last week in connection with a gold smuggling case, has…

8 hours ago

“Advocates Can appear In Confiscation Proceedings Under Forest Act”: MP High Court

The Madhya Pradesh High Court ruled that advocates can represent clients in confiscation cases under…

9 hours ago

Cement Prices Are Likely To Increase Because Of New Mineral Tax By States: Report

Cement prices across various states are expected to increase following a Supreme Court ruling that…

12 hours ago

“Plaint Against Teacher By Parent, Student: First Enquiry, Then Arrest”: Kerala HC

The Kerala High Court has laid down new guidelines to protect educators from hasty arrests…

15 hours ago

SC Ruling Paves Way For Visually Impaired Judges; Yavnika Shares Her Experience

Supreme Court recently opened up the doors for visually impaired candidates in judiciary by striking…

2 days ago