District Judge R K Gauba issued notice to the police and fixed the matter for hearing on January 9.
"At this stage, the additional public prosecutor (APP) for the Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi takes notice. The APP submits that he would need time to collect the facts and information from the concerned prosecutor. Put up for filing of copy of order, reply and further consideration on January 9," the district judge said.
The application moved by advocate D K Mishra, who claims to be an uncle of the victim's male friend, and lawyer Poonam Kaushik sought setting aside of the magisterial court's order for in-camera hearing and alleged that the court room was crowded because of the presence of large number of policemen.
In their application moved on behalf of "the concerned lawyers and the citizens of the country," the advocates said "Pssing the order, the metropolitan magistrate has cast a number of apprehensions and allegations on lawyers and mediapersons assembled there, being the representatives of nation who have been hurt.
"The whole nation is interested in knowing the proceedings of the case. In-camera trial cannot be done at the stage of pre-trial. It could have been done after case is committed to sessions court."
They also said in their plea that "police personnel were occupying the whole court room, so the court should not have passed such an order."
"Therefore, it is respectfully prayed that the court may set aside the order passed by the metropolitan magistrate (MM) and direct the MM to conduct the pre-trial proceeding in transparent manner," the application also said.
