1                                                                     	SpotLaw  	 	
 
Ajay K. Agrawal	 	
v. 
Union of India	 	
(S.B. SINHA and S.H. KAPADIA,JJ.,)	 	
(Supreme Court Of India)	 	
Writ Petition (Civil) No. 522 Of 2003 With W.P.(Crl.) No. 217, 575 Of 2003, 1	 Of 2004, 269 	
Of 2003 & 270 Of 2003 | 16	-11	-2004	 	
 
1. When the matter was called on Mr. Amarendra Sharan, the learned Addl. Solicitor General 
produced before us the latest Status Report as also the synopsis thereof. A copy of the said 
synopsis has been hand	ed over to Mr. Ajay K. Agrawal, writ petitioner appearing in person. 	
The learned ASG states that with a view to smooth conduct of the investigation as also trial 
of the cases, it is imperative that Video Conferencing facilities be provided by the States of	 	
Karnataka and Maharashtra. Let notices be issued to these States. The responses thereto in 
this behalf may be filed within the three weeks. Mr. Sanjay R. Hegde and Mr. Mukesh K. 
Giri, learned Counsel appearing for their respective States accept notice.	 	
 
2. The ASG further requests that the Court may pass an order to the effect that the 
deputationists who are involved with the investigation of the criminal cases may not be sent 
back to their parent department till the investigation is complete. Let notice b	e issued to the 	
Department of Personnel and Training, Union of India. We request the learned Solicitor 
General to assist us in the matter.	 	
 
3. CBI shall in the meantime furnish a list of the deputationists whose services may be found 
to be necessary before	 the Secretary, Department of Personnel and Training within one week.	 	
 
4. Let the matter appear four weeks hence.