Dijeesh vs The State of Kerala

K. Ramakrishnan, J.—This is an application filed by the petitioner who is the second accused in SC. No. 1847/2013 pending before the Assistant Sessions Court, Neyyattinkara for speedy disposal of the case under section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure.

It is alleged in the petition that petitioner has been arrayed as second accused in Crime No. 782/2012 of Parassala police station which was registered on the basis of the statement given by the second respondent as de facto complainant along with others alleging offences under section 143, 147, 148, 149, 294(b), 307 of Indian Penal Code and section 27 of Arms Act. According to the petitioner, it is a politically motivated case which has been registered on the date of declaration of election results of Neyyattinkara by election and there was some clash occurred between the party workers belonging to LDF and UDF in which the de facto complainant sustained some injuries. In fact, he had not involved in the case. However, now the second respondent had understood that he is innocent and he is prepared to settle the dispute with the petitioner. He has got an appointment as male warden in jail department and on account of the pendency of the case, his employment prospects will be affected and he is undergoing training now and unless the case is disposed of immediately he is likely to loose his employment as well. So being the case of 2013, there is no possibility of the case being taken by the learned Assistant Sessions Judge, unless a direction is given from this court. So the petitioner has no other remedy except to approach this court seeking the following remedy.

"to issue appropriate direction to Assistant Session''s Court, Neyyattinkara to advance S.C. No. 1847/2013 on its file to a nearby date and to dispose of the matter as expeditiously as possible at any rate within one month".

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Public Prosecutor and dispensed with notice to the second respondent.

I have called for a report from the Assistant Session''s Judge, Neyyattinkara, regarding the present stage of the case and the learned Session''s Judge has sent a report which reads as follows:-

The Hon''ble High Court vide OM under reference No. 1 directed me to report the present stage of the Sessions Case under reference No. 2 and the time required for the disposal of the case, if a direction is given from the Hon''ble High Court.

Upon making over the case before this court, at present the case stands posted on 16.9.2014 for return of summons for the accused and their appearance. The accused committed are two in number facing prosecution for the offences punishable under Ss. 143, 147, 148, 341, 294(b) and 307 r/w S. 149 IPC and under S. 27 of Arms Act as per Parassala Police Station Crime No. 782/12.

At present, this Court is having a total pendency around 3800 cases including Civil and Sessions Cases and out of which 1636 are Sessions Cases. The target fixed for the Sessions Cases are up to the year 2006 and all other cases of the under trial prisoners. The case under reference No. 2 is a fresh case at the stage of appearance of the parties and considering the priority and the target given, this case may not normally come up for consideration in the near future, unless and otherwise directed by the Hon''ble High Court. In this case there are 12 witnesses to be examined on the side of the prosecution. Certain samples collected from the place of occurrence were sent for expert examination before the FSL, and the report was not received. Even before getting the FSL report, the case was committed. The progress of the trial depends on the prompt appearance of the accused, witnesses in the trial and the arrival of the FSL report. If the FSL report is received, trial can very well be started on appearance of the accused and be concluded in a time framed manner. Old cases are already been scheduled for a period of six months. Since the FSL report is not received, I may not be able to suggest an early date for a time bound disposal, but I wish to report that I will strive my level best in complying the direction of the Hon''ble high court, in this regard.

This report is submitted for kind consideration

The counsel for the petitioner submitted that he has no other criminal back round and he has been falsely implicated in this case on account of some political rivalry and now the issues have been settled in the locality. He also got an employment and unless the case is disposed of, the pendency of the case will affect his prospects in the employment. So he prays for allowing the application.

The application was opposed by the learned Public Prosecutor on the ground that the said court is crowded with old cases and there is no necessity to jump queue and give priority for disposal of this case.

It is an admitted fact that the petitioner has been arrayed as second accused in SC. No. 1847/2013 pending before the Assistant Sessions Court, Neyyattinkara, which was originated from Crime No. 782/2012 of Parassala police station alleging offences under section 143, 147, 148, 149, 341, 294(b), 307 of Indian penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act. It is also an admitted fact that it is a new case as far as that court is concerned and also seen from the report of the learned Assistant Session''s Judge that around 1636 Session''s cases are pending in that Court and cases up to the year 2006 have been targeted for disposal for this year. It is also mentioned in the report that FSL report has not been received in this case. It is also mentioned that the progress of the trial depends on the prompt appearance of the accused, witnesses in the trial and arrival of the FSL report.

It is true that Article 21 of Constitution of India mandates speedy trial of criminal cases in respect of accused who are facing prosecution. On account of the large pendency of cases, in each Court the mandate of constitution could not be fulfilled by the courts in its letter and spirit. Further, allowing the new cases to be tried keeping the old cases in queue also will cause injustice to the persons who are waiting for justice to take up their case for a long time as well. But at the same time, in certain cases where exigencies arises the court will have to look into that aspect as well for considering this aspect. In this case, the petitioner has been now selected for the post of jail warden in the jail department and he is undergoing training and if the case is not disposed at the earliest possible time, he is likely to loose his employment as well. But we do not know whether he will change his colour and be a true Government servant in his department. However, taking into the exceptional circumstances that a person''s further prospects will be affected if a direction is not given, this court feels that direction can be given to the court below to expedite trial of the case and take steps to get the FSL immediately and dispose of the case in a time framed manner. So the petition is disposed of as follows:-

The Assistant Session''s Judge is directed to take all earnest attempt to dispose of this case as expeditiously as possible after taking steps to get the FSL report from the FSL, Thiruvananthapuram and if the accused appeared before court already, then dispose of the case as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of this order. The court below can advance the hearing for getting the appearance of the accused on getting the order of this court.

Office is directed to communicate this order to the concerned court immediately.