Full Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.K.MOHANAN WEDNESDAY, THE 31ST DAY OF JULY 2013 9TH SRAVANA, 1935 OP(Crl.).No. 2427 of 2013 (Q) ------------------------------ MC.NO. 41/2011 OF CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE COURT ,MANJERI ---------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ---------------------- PATHUMMAKUTTY, AGED 6 YEARS, W/O.MAMMED HAJI, KIZHAKU VEEDU HOUSE , CHIRAYIL CHUNGAM CHIRAYIL POST, MALAPPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.K.I.SAGEER RESPONDENTS: ----------------------------- 1. K.FOUSIA, AGED 2 YEARS, W/O.MUHAMMED AMEEN, KIZHAKKU VEEDU HOUSE, CHIRAYIL CHUNGAM CHIRAYIL POST, MALAPPURAM, PIN-67”
2. MUHAMMED AMEER, AGED 3 YEARS, MAMMED HAJI, KIZHAKKU VEEDU HOUSE, CHIRAYIL CHUNGAM CHIRAYIL POST, MALAPPURAM, PIN-67”
3. MUHAMMED HAJI, AGED 7 YEARS, S/O.KUNHAVARANKUTTY HAJI, KIZHAKKU VEEDU HOUSE, CHIRAYIL CHUNGAM CHIRAYIL POST, MALAPPURAM, PIN-67”
4. THAJUDHEEN, AGED 4 YEARS, S/O.MAMMED HAJI, KIZHAKKU VEEDU HOUSE, CHIRAYIL CHUNGAM CHIRAYIL POST, MALAPPURAM, PIN-676 113 THIS OP (CRIMINAL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 31-07-2013, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: sts OP(Crl.).No. 2427 of 2013 (Q) ------------------------------------------ APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS: -------------------------------------------- EXT.P1:- A TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION IN MC NO. 41/2011 OF HON'BLE CJM, MANJERI SUBMITTED BY THE IST RESPONDENT EXT.P2:- A TRUE COPY OF HTE ORDER DTD 20/07/2011 IN CRMP NO. 2669/2011 IN MC NO. 41/2011 ON THE FILE OF THE HON'BLE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE COURT, MANJERI EXT.P3:- A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DTD 6/9/2011 IN CRL.APPEAL. NO. 240/2011 OF SESSIONS COURT, MANJERI RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS: NIL /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO.JUDGE sts V.K.MOHANAN, J.
---------------------------------------- O.P.(Crl.).No.2427 of 2013 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 31st day of July, 2013 JUDGMENT The grievance of the petitioner is that though she preferred in M.C.No.41/2011 before the Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Manjeri on 20/7/2011, there is no progress in the proceedings and no steps are being taken to dispose the case. Therefore, the above original petition is filed with a prayer to direct the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Manjeri to dispose of M.C.No.41/2011 expeditiously as directed in Ext.P3 order of the Sessions Court in Crl. Appeal No.240/2011.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners as well as the learned Public Prosecutor.
3. This court by order dated 22/7/2013 directed the Registrar to get the remarks from the Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Manjeri about the delay in disposing M.C.No.41/2011. Accordingly, it is reported by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, by letter No.4230/13 addressing the Registrar that on 6/1/2012 PW1 was examined in chief and during the course of the proceedings there was a suggestion for the O.P.(Crl.).No.2427 o”
2. settlement and the case posted into the Adalath but subsequently case is posted for evidence on 25/5/2012 on that day the petitioner counsel applied for adjournment and accordingly posted to 10/8/2012. On 10/8/2012 the petitioner filed chief affidavit as PW2 but both the parties sought for adjournment and thus the case is adjourned to 16/6/2012 and the case was adjourned for the cross examination of PW2 and the case was posted on 23/11/2012 but thereafter the petitioner did not appear to face cross examination in spite of repeated postings on 14/12/2012 and 17/12/2012 and strict direction was given to the petitioner to appear on 17/12/2012. On that day both the parties submitted that matter will be settled and thus posted on 12/1/2013. However on 31/1/2013, as there was no settlement and PW2 was cross examined and the case was further posted for evidence to 8/2/2013, 15/2/2013, 22/2/2013, 7/3/2013 and 14/3/2013. On 14/3/2013 PW3 was examined and the case was again posted for further evidence to 25/3, 3/4, 5/4, 11/4 and 19/4 of 2013. It is also brought to the notice of this Court that, the Presiding Officer, on the date of the filing of the case was transferred and thereafter another Presiding Officer was posted and when O.P.(Crl.).No.2427 o”
3. he was promoted, he was transferred and the present presiding officer took charge on 20/5/2013. Thus going by the report it appears to me there was no lapse on the part of the Court below in completing the trial. The petitioner and her witnesses did not extent the co-operation to complete the trial in time. The Chief Judicial Magistrate in his letter referred above informed this Court that every endevour shall be made to dispose the case within reasonable time. Accordingly, recording the above report this original petition is disposed of with the observation that the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate will expedite the trial as expeditiously as possible, at rate, within 'three months' from the date of producing a copy of this order. Sd/- V.K.MOHANAN, JUDGE AS