IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 19544 of 2008(B)
1. MANJUNATH,
... Petitioner
2. JAYADEVAN,AGED 79 YEARS,
3. PADMINIKUTTY, AGED 75 YEARS,
Vs
1. ASHA S.M., AGED 36 YEARS,
... Respondent
2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE
For Petitioner :SRI.R.SATISH KUMAR
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT
Dated :09/07/2008
O R D E R
R.BASANT, J
------------------------------------
W.P(C). No.19544 of 2008
-------------------------------------
Dated this the 9th day of July, 2008
J U D G M E N T
The short grievance of the petitioners, who are the husband
of the defacto complainant and her father in law and mother in
alw aged 79 years and 75 years respectively, is that a prosecution
under Section 420 I.P.C in which cognizance was taken as early as
in 2003 which was transferred and re-numbered in 2007, has not
been disposed of even now. Considering the advanced age of
petitioners 2 and 3, it is prayed that the proceedings may be
directed to be disposed of expeditiously without infliction of any
further trauma on petitioners 2 and 3. Report of the learned
Magistrate was called for. The learned Magistrate in the report
submits that enquiry under Section 244 Cr.P.C has not
commenced yet. The learned Magistrate prays for 6 months’
further time to dispose of the case.
2. I am certainly satisfied that notwithstanding the fact
that the case now bears the number of a case of 2007, the same
has been pending for a long period of time and every effort must
now be made by the learned Magistrate to dispose of the same
expeditiously.
W.P(C). No.19544 of 2008 2
3. In the result, this Writ Petition is allowed. It is directed
that the learned Magistrate shall make every endeavour to
dispose of the case as expeditiously as possible – at any rate,
within a period of 4 months from the date on which a copy of this
judgment is placed before the learned Magistrate.
4. Issue copy of this judgment to the learned counsel for
the petitioner forthwith. Compliance shall be reported to this
Court.
5. Considering the age of petitioners 2 and 3, it is
directed that the learned Magistrate must not insist on the
personal presence of the said petitioners and they must be
permitted to be represented by their counsel unless the progress
of the case demands such personal appearance of those
petitioners.
(R.BASANT, JUDGE)
rtr/-
W.P(C). No.19544 of 2008 3
W.P(C). No.19544 of 2008 4
R.BASANT, J
————————————
W.P(C). No.19544 of 2008
————————————-
Dated this the 30th day of June, 2008
ORDER
The short grievance of the petitioners, which include two
elderly couple aged 79 and 75 years, is that C.C.No.537 of 2007
pending before the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class-II, Kollam
is not being taken up by the learned Magistrate for consideration
and disposal notwithstanding Ext.P12 application filed by them
before the learned Magistrate in April, 2008. I find the request of
the petitioners to be perfectly justified and legitimate.
2. Call for a report from the learned Magistrate as to why
the case was not taken up for consideration and disposal. I need
only mention that I expect the learned Magistrate to consider the
prayer of the petitioners for expeditious disposal as emergently as
possible. The learned Magistrate in the report shall report to this
Court the action taken so far and the probable time that will be
required for final disposal of the case.
3. Await report of the learned Magistrate. Call on
09.07.08. The Registry shall ensure that the report is received by
W.P(C). No.19544 of 2008 5
then.
(R.BASANT, JUDGE)
rtr/-