Disposed

Suzie Vaz and Anr., v. State of Goa, Thr. Its Chief Secretary and 2 Ors.

Bombay HC17 Feb 2020WPCR/18/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners sought quashing of FIRs on grounds of innocence and delay. Court declined quashing due to disclosure of offences but directed Trial Courts to expedite proceedings under Sections 299 and 317 Cr.P.C. within six months.

What did the court decide?

Expedite proceedings for six months under Sections 299 and 317 Cr.P.C.; liberty to file an authenticated copy before Trial Courts.

Suzie Vaz and Anr., Vs State of Goa, Thr. Its Chief… — Quashing and FIR | Bombay HC (2020)

¶1

1 wp18-20dt.17-02-2020

¶2

 Santosh

¶3

 IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA
 CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.18 OF 2020

¶4

Suzie Vaz and another. ….. Petitioners.

¶5

 Versus

¶6

State of Goa and others.…..Respondents.

¶7

Mr. Rajeev Lochan, Advocate for the Petitioners.

¶8

Mr. Gaurish Nagvenkar, Additional Public Prosecutor for the
Respondents No.1 and 2.

¶9

Respondent No.3 in person.

¶10

Coram : M.S. Sonak &
 Smt. M.S. Jawalkar, JJ.
 Date : 17th February, 2020.

¶11

P.C. :

¶12

Heard Mr. Rajeev Lochan for the Petitioners, Mr. Gaurish
Nagvenkar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the Respondents
No.1 and 2 and Respondent No.3, who is present in person.

¶13

2.This Petition seeks quashing of two FIRs registered against
the Petitioners. The basic ground is that the Petitioners are innocent
and despite their innocence, they are facing criminal prosecution
since last almost 7 years from the date of record of the two FIRs.
Mr. Lochan has placed on record Roznamas in Criminal Case No.
256/S/2016/C and Criminal Case No.IPC/256/2014/D, pending

¶14

2 wp18-20dt.17-02-2020

¶15

before the Courts of Judicial Magistrate, First Class 'C' Court and
Judicial Magistrate, First Class 'D' Court, both at Mapusa, Bardez,
Goa.

¶16

3.According to us, on the basis of the contention that the
Petitioners are innocent, the FIRs cannot be quashed. Upon perusal
of the FIRs, it cannot be said that no commission of any offence is
disclosed. However, Mr. Lochan, learned Counsel for the Petitioners
is quite right in his submission that right to speedy trial, is also a
fundamental right.

¶17

4.From the perusal of the Roznamas in the two matters, it
appears that the Charge-sheets have been filed against several accused
persons. Further, there is difficulty in appearance of some of the
accused persons, who are, probably, absconding. The Roznamas
indicate that Section 299 Cr.P.C. procedure may have been adopted.
However, there is no clarity on this issue.

¶18

5. Section 299 of Cr.P.C. reads as follows :

¶19

“ 299. Record of evidence in absence of accused.

¶20

(1) If it is proved that an accused person has absconded, and that there is no immediate prospect of arresting him, the Court competent to try , or commit for trial] such person for the offence complained of may, in his absence, examine the witnesses (if any) produced on behalf of the prosecution, and record their depositions and any such deposition may, on the arrest of such person, be given in evidence against him on the inquiry into, or trial for, the

¶21

3 wp18-20dt.17-02-2020

¶22

offence with which he is charged, if the deponent is dead or
incapable of giving evidence or cannot be found or his
presence cannot be procured without an amount of- delay,
expense or inconvenience which, under the circumstances
of the case, would be unreasonable.

¶23

(2) If it appears that an offence punishable with death or
imprisonment for life has been committed by some person
or persons unknown, the High Court or the Sessions Judge
may direct that any Magistrate of the first class shall hold
an inquiry and examine any witnesses who can give
evidence concerning the offence and any depositions so
taken may be given in evidence against any person who is
subsequently accused of the offence, if the deponent is dead
or incapable of giving evidence or beyond the limits of
India.”

¶24

6.Similarly, Section 317 of Cr.P.C., which deals with the
provision for inquiries and trial being held in the absence of accused
in certain cases, reads as follows :

¶25

“317. Provision for inquiries and trial being held in the
absence of accused in certain cases.

¶26

(1) At any stage of an inquiry or trial under this Code, if
the Judge or Magistrate is satisfied, for reasons to be
recorded, that the personal attendance of the accused before
the Court is not necessary in the interests of justice, or that
the accused persistently disturbs the proceedings in Court,
the Judge or Magistrate may, if the accused is represented by
a pleader, dispense with his attendance and proceed with
such inquiry or trial in his absence, and may, at any
subsequent stage of the proceedings, direct the personal
attendance of such accused.

¶27

(2) If the accused in any such case is not represented by a
pleader, or if the Judge or Magistrate considers his personal
attendance necessary, he may, if he thinks fit and for reasons

¶28

4 wp18-20dt.17-02-2020

¶29

to be recorded by him, either adjourn such inquiry or trial,
or order that the case of such accused be taken up or tried
separately.”

¶30

7.According to us, the Trial Courts taking up the aforesaid
two criminal cases, must explore the possibility of proceeding under
Sections 299 and 317 of Cr.P.C., so that the trial of the accused
persons, which includes the Petitioners who are attending the Courts
on regular basis, is not unduly delayed.

¶31

8.Accordingly, we direct the Trial Courts to expedite the
proceedings in Criminal Case No. 256/S/2016/C and Criminal Case
No.IPC/256/2014/D, pending before the Courts of Judicial
Magistrate, First Class 'C' Court and Judicial Magistrate, First Class
'D' Court at Mapusa, Bardez, Goa and endeavour to conclude the
same within a period of six months from the date of an
authenticated copy of this order is placed before them.

¶32

9.According to us, this is the maximum relief that we can
grant to the Petitioners, at this stage. The Petitioners are granted
liberty to place an authenticated copy of this order before the Trial
Courts, on the next date fixed by the Trial Courts. Further, we direct
even the Petitioners to co-operate in expeditious conclusion of the
trial.

¶33

5 wp18-20dt.17-02-2020

¶34

10. The Petition stands disposed of. No order as to costs.

¶35

 Smt. M.S. Jawalkar, J. M.S. Sonak, J.

Suzie Vaz and Anr., v. State of Goa, Thr. Its Chief Secretary and 2 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Suzie Vaz and Anr., v. State of Goa, Thr. Its Chief Secretary and 2 Ors.

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

Peter B. Colaco and Sons Vs State of Goa, through Its Chief Secretary and Ors.

Ivan Singh Vs the Asstt. Commissioner of Income-Tax CIRCLE-1 (1) and Anr.

State of Goa, through Its Chief Secretary and Ors., Vs Peter B. Colaco and Sons

Jose Manuel Fernandes., Vs Peter Rock Samson Gonsalves and 3 Ors.

The Chairman, Central Promotor De Instrucao., Vs the State of Goa, Thr. the Chief Secretary and 2 Ors.

Netajirao Sanjay Prabhudessai., Vs the State of Goa, Thr. Chief Secretary, Govt. of Goa and 6 Ors.