Overview

• A bench of Justices M.M. Sundresh and Satish Chandra Sharma indicated it would not interfere, prompting Medha Patkar to withdraw her petition.
• The Delhi High Court on July 29 upheld a March 18 trial court order that rejected Patkar’s application as a delay tactic and found no sufficient cause to add a witness.
• Justice Shalinder Kaur held that Sections 254(1) and 254(2) CrPC were correctly applied, limiting late-stage additions without clear justification.
• The proposed witness, Nandita Narayan, was not in the original list and her late introduction after other prosecution witnesses had testified was found unjustified.
• The case stems from a December 2000 complaint over a November 10, 2000 advertisement, with proceedings continuing against V.K. Saxena after earlier compromises and prolonged delays from settlement efforts, the pandemic, and adjournments.