In a criminal revision, the Single Judge addressed a plea regarding connected protest petitions not taken cognizance. The court directed the District Judge to submit a report on missing files before disposing of the revision.
Direction to Learned District Judge, Srikakulam to submit a report on misplaced protest petitions within four weeks.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
THE HON’BLE SMT JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI
CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.146 OF 2020
ORDER:-
The present revision is filed against the order dated 18.11.2019 passed in Crl.M.P.No.1767 of 2019 in C.C.No.636 of 2011 whereby the petitioner has filed the petition under Section 309 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short ‘Cr.P.C.’) to adjourn the case till decision is taken in three protest petitions pertaining to crime Nos.173 of 2010, 174 of 2010 and 175 of 2010 of J.R. Puram Police Station.
2
and 172 of 2010. Though the petitioner has also filed protest petitions in other cases also i.e. 173 of 2010, 174 of 2010 and 175 of 2010, they have not taken cognizance. Earlier, accused in other cases filed criminal petitions before this Court vide criminal petition Nos.8319, 11129, 11130 and 11132 of 2011 and they were dismissed by this Court on 05.12.2018. However, the Court has considered the plea of learned counsel for the petitioners therein and dispensed with the presence of the accused. Now trial is going to be proceeded in the other cases. As such the petitioner came up with this application before the Court below. The Court below dismissed the application on the ground that after lapse of almost ten years, the petitioner/complainant filed this petition, till now there is no whisper from his side about the other crimes. Therefore, it shows that the petitioner has filed the petition only to delay the proceedings. The Court below has observed that since the cases are coming up only for trial and final decision would be delivered at the time of the judgment, no prejudice would be caused if the other crimes are proceeded with.
3
of his best efforts he is not able to persuade the people to trace the files. It is further stated that if the above cases are not traced the petitioner would be put to irreparable loss and hardship.
Consequently, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed.
JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI
Date: 19.08.2020 IKN/KA
4
THE HON’BLE SMT JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI
CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.146 OF 2020
Date: 19.08.2020
IKN/KA
3 issues framed by the court
Whether to direct the District Judge to submit a report on protest petitions alleged to be misplaced in cases where no cognizance was taken.
To prevent irreparable loss and hardship to the petitioner due to untraced files of connected cases.
Whether the delay in filing the revision petition over ten years justified dismissing it.
3 provisions across 2 enactments
Petitioner
State
Lalitha Kanneganti
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
