Disposed

Fakira Kashiba Jadhav v. the State of Mah

Bombay HC20 Mar 2012WP/118/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court dismissed a criminal writ petition filed by a father of a deceased victim for failure of the Sessions Court to dispose of his case expeditiously. The petitioner withdrew specific allegations. The court directed the Sessions Judge to try the case strictly in accordance with Section 309 of the CrPC.

What did the court decide?

Directions to the Learned Adhoc Additional Sessions Judge, Latur to dispose of Sessions Case No.23/2007 according to Section 309 CrPC.

Fakira Kashiba Jadhav Vs the State of Mah — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Bombay HC (2012)

¶1

¶2

Criminal W.P. No.118/2012

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY,

¶4

BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶5

CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.118 OF 2012

¶6

Fakira s/o Kashiba Jadhav, Age 65 years, Occ. Agri., R/o Shirala, Taluka and District Latur

¶7

... PETITIONER

¶8

VERSUS

¶9

The State of Maharashtra through Assistant Police Inspector, Police Station, Gategaon, Taluka and District Latur (Copy to be served on the Public Prosecutor, High Court of Bombay, Bench at Aurangabad)

¶10

... RESPONDENT

¶11

Shri A.V. Patil, Advocate for the petitioner Shri N.B. Patil, A.P.P. for the respondent

¶12

CORAM : U.D. SALVI, J. DATED : 20th March, 2012.

¶13

ORAL JUDGMENT:

¶14

Heard. Perused. Rule. Rule made returnable

¶15

forthwith. Taken up for final hearing by mutual consent of parties.

¶16

The petitioner, father of the deceased – being victim within the meaning of Section 2(wa) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, has moved this petition for directions to the

¶17

¶18

Criminal W.P. No.118/2012

¶19

learned Adhoc Additional Sessions Judge, Latur to dispose off the Sessions Case No.23/2007 as expeditiously as possible to be disposed off within a period of one month. Paying heed to the exception taken by the State that the concerned accused have not been made party to the present petition, Mr. Patil, learned Advocate for the petitioner submits that the allegations made against the accused are mere illustrations and the same would be withdrawn if mere directions are issued to the learned Adhoc Additional Sessions Judge, Latur to conduct the proceedings strictly in accordance with the provisions of Section 309 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. State has no objection for such directions.

¶20

In the circumstances, the petitioner withdraws all allegations made against the accused in the present petition. However, it is revealed that the charges under Sections 498-A, 306 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code were framed long back as on 5/5/2007 and the case continues to remain undisposed till this date. Section 309 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 requires that every trial shall be held as expeditiously as possible, and in particular, when the examination of witnesses has once begun, the same shall be continued from day to day until all the witnesses in attendance have been examined, unless the Court

¶21

¶22

Criminal W.P. No.118/2012

¶23

finds the adjournment of the same beyond the following day to be necessary for reasons to be recorded. If the mandate of law in Section 309 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 was to be followed, perhaps the case would have ended long back. It appears that, the learned Sessions Judge has lost sight of the provisions of Section 309 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 and he needs to be reminded of the same. The learned Adhoc Additional Sessions Judge at Latur is, therefore, directed to dispose off the Sessions Case No.23/2007 strictly in accordance with the provisions of Section 309 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. Rule is made absolute accordingly. Criminal Writ Petition No.118/2012 stands disposed off accordingly.

Fakira Kashiba Jadhav v. the State of Mah

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Fakira Kashiba Jadhav v. the State of Mah

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Fulchand Raghunat Pardeshi and Ors. Vs the State of Mah and Anr.

Pandurang Pandit Chavan and Anr. Vs the State of Mah

Dr Shaikh Ahemed Khalil Ahemed Vs the State of Mah and Anr.

Anil Sonyabapu Todmal Vs Dnyandeo Nan Thevarkar and Anr.

Anil Sonyabapu Todmal Vs Dnyandeo Nan Thevarkar and Anr.

Naser Saeed Bin Hamud Vs Sameerq Naser Hamood and Anr.