Disposed

Babu@Babula Gouda v. State of Orissa

Orissa HC4 Jul 2017BLAPL/824/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Chief Justice noted the repeated delay in disposing of a Section 20 case by the Additional Sessions Judge despite prior directions. The judgment directed the Additional Sessions Judge to conclude the trial expeditiously using coercive steps.

What did the court decide?

Directed the Additional Sessions Judge to conclude the trial expeditiously using all coercive steps to secure witness attendance.

Babu@Babula Gouda Vs State of Orissa — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Orissa HC (2017)

¶1

BLAPL No.824 of 2017

¶2

11.03.2019

¶3

Perused the report of the learned Addl. District & Sessions Judge, Aska, Ganjam.

¶4

It appears that pursuant to the Order of this Court dated 04.07.2017, the Presiding Officer who was there in the said court had sought for three months’ time for disposal of S.T. Case No.20 of 2016 on 5.2.2018. When the matter was posted before this Court on 15.01.2019, this Court had sought for a report that as to why in spite of direction of this Court in the year 2017, the case was not taken up for its disposal. Thereafter, the present Presiding Officer though has stated that nine witnesses have been examined but has given a report seeking six months’ more time for disposal of the aforesaid case and has posted the case to 11.03.2019 for trial.

¶5

From the aforesaid, it appears that the successive Addl. Sessions Judge had hardly evince any interest in disposal of the case in spite of the direction of this Court to targeting to conclude the trial in a time bound manner. They have taken the direction of this Court in a very light manner which is visible from the fact that the earlier Presiding Officer though had sought for adjournment for three months but, in the meanwhile more than a year has elapsed, the present Addl. Sessions Judge instead of complying with the direction of this Court, reported that sincere and effective steps are being taken for early disposal of the case and had sought for at least six months’ time for disposal of the case.

¶6

The said letter of the learned Addl. Sessions Judge does not show that he has taken the direction of this Court seriously.

¶7

¶8

As such, I am not happy with the report given by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge.

¶9

Hence, learned Addl. Sessions Judge is directed to conclude the trial expeditiously taking all coercive steps to procure the attendance of the witnesses. The learned Addl. Sessions Judge must bestow the required attention to the case record.

¶10

Copy of this order be communicated to the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Aska, Ganjam forthwith.

¶11

………………….. S.Pujahari, J.

¶12

RKS

Babu@Babula Gouda v. State of Orissa

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Babu@Babula Gouda v. State of Orissa

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mirza S.I.Baig Vs State

Khageswar@Dulla Goch Vs State

Rahasbihari Seth Vs State

Basudeb Barik Vs Family Members

Malay Moharana@Malaya Kumar Moharana Vs State of Orissa

Ranjan Mahabhoi Vs State of Orissa