Rahul @ Sambhu vs State Of Kerala on 16 July, 2007

       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Crl MC No. 2270 of 2007()


1. RAHUL @ SAMBHU,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE
                       ...       Respondent

                For Petitioner  :SRI.G.SUDHEER

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT

 Dated :16/07/2007

 O R D E R
                                     R.BASANT, J

                           ------------------------------------

                            Crl.M.C.No.2270 of 2007

                          -------------------------------------

                       Dated this the 16th day of July, 2007


                                       O R D E R

The petitioner faces indictment for offences punishable under

Sections 341 and 323 I.P.C. The case was registered in 2004 and the

petitioner had appeared as early as in 2005, it is submitted. Trial has

not commenced yet. The petitioner is an unemployed person. He

wants to seek a job abroad. The petitioner’s application for passport

has not been considered because of the pendency of this prosecution.

The matter is settled also, it is submitted. The defacto complainant

will come to the court only if he is summoned from the court.

Therefore the petitioner is not able to file an application for

composition also. In these circumstances, it is prayed that there may

be a direction for expeditious disposal of the case pending against the

petitioner before the learned Magistrate.

2. Has the petitioner applied before the learned Magistrate ?

Did he apprise the learned Magistrate of the peculiar circumstances

in this case ? It is admitted that no application has been filed. I am

certainly of the opinion that it is for the petitioner to move the learned

Magistrate and apprise the learned Magistrate of all these

circumstances. Only if the learned Magistrate does not grant the

request of the petitioner, can the petitioner be permitted to approach

this court. I find no merit in the request made at the first instance

Crl.M.C.No.2270 of 2007 2

before this Court.

3. Going through the petition, the petitioner appears to have

a very just case for expeditious disposal. With the observation that

the petitioner can apply before the learned Magistrate and the

learned Magistrate must pass appropriate orders on such application

for expeditious disposal, this Crl.M.C is, dismissed.

4. Issue a copy of this order to the learned counsel for the

petitioner for production before the learned Magistrate.

(R.BASANT, JUDGE)

rtr/-

Crl.M.C.No.2270 of 2007 3