Prakash @ Balaji @ Khan v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC24 Oct 2025CRL.P/14177/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Section 482 CrPC / Section 528 BNSS petition seeking time-bound disposal of trial; C.C.No.23742/2024 arising out of Crime No.132/2024 Bandepalya PS, transferred to CCB (OCW) East Squad PS; Section 380 IPC burglary and theft of gold ornaments between 05.04.2024 and 28.04.2024; accused in judicial custody with multiple cases; reliance on High Court Bar Association Allahabad v. State of U.P., Crl.A.No.3589/2023, para 32, constitutional courts should not normally fix time-bound schedule for disposal; outer limit only in exceptional circumstances; direction to expedite trial issued; petition disposed of; Karnataka High Court, Mohammad Nawaz J., 24 October 2025.

What did the court decide?

Prayer for time-bound disposal declined; learned Magistrate directed to expedite the trial in C.C.No.23742/2024 since the charge sheet stands filed. ¶¶45

Prakash @ Balaji @ Khan Vs State of Karnataka — Karnataka HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Prayer for time-bound disposal declined; learned Magistrate directed to expedite the trial in C.C.No.23742/2024 since the charge sheet stands filed.

¶¶45

Issue for consideration

Whether the trial in C.C.No.23742/2024 pending against the petitioner before the I Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bangalore should be directed to be concluded within a stipulated/time-bound period, given his judicial custody. +1 more

¶¶28

Court's answer

The Court declined to direct the trial Court to conduct the trial in a time-bound manner, but, considering that the charge sheet had already been filed, directed the learned Magistrate to expedite the trial.

¶¶44

Ratio / Principle

Mere registration of other cases against the petitioner is by itself not a ground to grant the relief sought (a time-bound trial direction), as such directions would adversely affect the functioning of the trial Court and would be difficult to implement.

¶¶41

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Criminal Petition No. 14177 of 2025 (High Court of Karnataka, Mohammad Nawaz J., 24.10.2025) filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. read with Section 528 BNSS sought a direction for expeditious and time-bound disposal of trial in C.C.No.23742/2024 (arising out of Crime No.132/2024 of Bandepalya P.S., later transferred to CCB (OCW) East Squad P.S.), for offence punishable under Section 380 IPC, pending before the I Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bangalore. The petitioner, in judicial custody owing to many cases registered against him, sought conclusion of the trial within a stipulated period. Placing reliance on the observations of the Hon'ble Apex Court in High Court Bar Association, Allahabad v. State of U.P. & Ors., Crl.A.No.3589/2023 (para 32), that constitutional courts should not normally fix time-bound schedules for disposal of cases and should do so only in exceptional circumstances, this Court held that mere pendency of other cases against the petitioner is not a ground to grant such relief, since such directions adversely affect the functioning of the trial Court and are difficult to implement. Declining the time-bound direction, the Court directed the learned Magistrate to expedite the trial as the charge sheet already stood filed. Petition disposed of.

¶1

NC: 2025:KHC:42227 CRL.P No. 14177 of 2025

¶2

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶5

DATED THIS THE 24^TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025

¶6

BEFORE

¶7

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ

¶8

CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 14177 OF 2025

¶9

BETWEEN:

¶10

PRAKASH @ BALAJI @ KHAN S/O.SRI.RAMU AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS, R/AT.101, 4TH CROSS, I BHUVANESHVARI NAGAR UTTARAHALLI BENGALURU-560061.

¶11

…PETITIONER

¶12

(BY SRI. G M SHARATHKUMAR., ADVOCATE)

¶13

AND:

¶14

STATE OF KARNATAKA BY BANDEPALYA PS REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BENGALURU

¶15

Digitally signed by LAKSHMI T Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶16

STATE OF KARNATAKA BY CCB(OCW) (EAST) SQUAD PS REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BENGALURU - 560001

¶17

SRIP SAI DINESH S/O P SRINIVAS RAO AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS, RESIDENT OF NO.330, S V NIVASA, NO.102, 7TH MAIN, ITI LAYOUT, BENGALURU-560068

¶18

…RESPONDENTS

¶19

(BY SRI. RAHUL RAI K, HCGP FOR R1 AND R2)

¶20

¶21

NC: 2025:KHC:42227 CRL.P No. 14177 of 2025

¶22

HC-KAR

¶23

THIS CRL.P FILED U/S 482 CR.P.C (U/S 528 BNSS) PRAYING TO DIRECT THE LEARNED TRIAL COURT TO ENSURE EXPEDITIOUS AND TIME-BOUND DISPOSAL OF CC.NO.23742/2024 ARISING OUT OF CR.NO.132/2024 REGISTERED BY RESPONDENT NO.1 BANDEPALYA P.S., NOW TRANSFERRED TO CCB (OCW) EAST SQUAD P.S., BENGALURU, FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 380 OF IPC, PENDING ON THE FILE OF I ACJM, BENGALURU WITHIN A STIPULATED PERIOD.

¶24

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶25

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ

¶26

ORAL ORDER

¶27

Learned High Court Government Pleader accepts notice for the State / respondent No.1.

¶28

Petitioner is seeking to issue a direction for the expeditious and time bound disposal of the trial pending against him in C.C.No.23742/2024 on the file of I Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bangalore.

¶29

The first informant has reported to the police

¶30

about the burglary that took place in his house and missing of gold ornaments etc. between 05.4.2024 and 28.4.2024.

¶31

¶32

NC: 2025:KHC:42227 CRL.P No. 14177 of 2025

¶33

HC-KAR

¶34

Charge sheet is filed against the petitioner for

¶35

the offence punishable under Sections 380 of IPC.

¶36

It is submitted by the learned counsel that as

¶37

there are many cases registered against the petitioner, he is in judicial custody and therefore, the trial Court may be directed to conclude the trial within a specific period.

¶38

The Hon’ble Apex Court in High Court Bar Association, Allahabad v. State of U.P. & Ors. in Crl.A.No.3589/2023 dated 29.02.2024, has observed in para No.32, which is extracted here under:

¶39

“32. Therefore, constitutional Courts should not normally fix a time-bound schedule for disposal of cases pending in any Court. The pattern of pendency of various categories of cases pending in every Court, including High Courts, is different. The situation at the grassroots level is better known to the judges of the concerned Courts. Therefore, the issue of giving out-ofturn priority to certain cases should be best left to the concerned Courts. The orders fixing the outer limit for the disposal of cases should be passed only in exceptional circumstances to meet extraordinary situations.”

¶40

Merely because there are other cases registered

¶41

against the petitioner itself is not a ground to grant the

¶42

4 - NC: 2025:KHC:42227 CRL.P No. 14177 of 2025

¶43

HC-KAR

¶44

relief sought. Such directions will adversely affect the functioning of the trial Court and may be difficult to implement. Hence, this Court is not inclined to direct the trial Court to conduct the trial in a time bound manner. However, considering that the charge sheet is already filed, the learned Magistrate is directed to expedite the trial.

¶45

Petition is disposed of .

¶46

Sd/(MOHAMMAD NAWAZ) JUDGE

¶47

LDC

¶48

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 66

Prakash @ Balaji @ Khan v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Prakash @ Balaji @ Khan v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ncdex E Markets Limited Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri.Rangegowda Vs Sri Manjunath

Srikantha S Vs State of Karnataka

Mr Thankachan Vs State of Karnataka by

Smt Shakila P Shetty Vs Sri Ramesh K K

Yogesh Kumar G Hosamani Vs State of Karnataka