The Madurai Bench directed the Judicial Magistrate to complete trials in the intervention of the petitioner's case within six months, citing a Supreme Court precedent, and warned against dilatory tactics.
Direction to the Judicial Magistrate to complete the trial within six months if the petitioner cooperates.
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
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 22.03.2017
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.N.PRAKASH CRL.O.P.(MD)No.3092 of 2017
Shanmugaiah
: Petitioner/Sole Accused
-Vs-
The State Represented by the Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Sankarankovil, Tirunelveli District. : Respondent/Complainant
PRAYER: Petition is filed under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code praying to expedite the disposal of the case pending before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Sankarankovil, in C.C.No.306 of 2014, within the time stipulated by this Court.
For Petitioner : Mr.V.Selva
For Respondent : Mr.A.P.Balasubramani, Government Advocate (Crl.side) **********
O R D E R
The petitioner is facing prosecution in C.C.No.306 of 2014 before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Sankarankovil for offences under Sections 498(A) and 506(i) of the Indian Penal Code. It is the grievance of the petitioner that there are only eight prosecution witnesses cited in the charge sheet, despite which, the trial in the case is prolonging.
2
Assistant Registrar(AD-II)
/True copy/
Sub Assistant Registrar
To
SML
AE/RR/SAR3/06.04.2017/2P/4C
Order made in CRL.O.P.(MD)No.3092 of 2017 Dated : 22.03.2017
2 issues framed by the court
Whether to direct the trial court to complete the trial within a stipulated period.
Whether the petitioner's absence would attract prosecution for providing false information.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Vinod Kumar vs. State of PunjabApplied¶5
2015 (1) Scale 542.
3 provisions across 2 enactments
Shanmugaiah
The State Represented by the Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Sankarankovil, Tirunelveli District
P.N.Prakash
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
