New Delhi

The Delhi High Court on Wednesday refused to hear a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) that sought the creation of a court-appointed panel to monitor every stage of proceedings in the Red Fort blast case.

The petition had requested day-to-day hearings and monthly status reports to be submitted before a judicial authority to ensure timely progress.

A Bench comprising Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela declined to intervene at this stage, emphasising that the plea was premature, since the trial had not yet commenced. The judges underlined that judicial monitoring is warranted only in cases where proceedings remain stalled for years — not before they even begin. “The trial hasn’t even started, and you want us to monitor its conduct? Monitoring becomes relevant when matters are pending for years,” the Bench observed.

The court further noted that the petitioner had not shown any violation of fundamental rights that could justify the use of a PIL for such relief.

After the court made its reservations clear, the petitioner eventually opted to withdraw the plea.

During the hearing, counsel for the petitioner argued that judicial oversight would provide confidence to the families of the victims. He pointed out that several terror trials in the past had taken decades, and even the earlier Red Fort blast case had stretched on for many years before reaching a conclusion.

Appearing for the Centre, Additional Solicitor General Chetan Sharma submitted that the plea was misconceived, stating that the investigation had already been transferred from the Delhi Police to the National Investigation Agency (NIA). He added that the case would now proceed under provisions of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA).

ALSO READ: Syed Nawaz Miftahi illuminates the world of the blind

The now-withdrawn PIL had been filed by former MLA Pankaj Pushkar. It sought a High Court-supervised mechanism for each step of the trial and urged that the case be completed within six months. It argued that the Red Fort blast targeted a symbol of India’s sovereignty and claimed that the families of the victims continue to be denied the “right to truth,” which the petition described as integral to the right to dignity under Article 21.