Lakshmi vs the State Rep by Its,

Lakshmi vs The State Rep by Its,

Type Court Judgment Court Chennai Orders Decided Jan 31, 2025

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1745057

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1745057
Court: Chennai Orders High Court
Judge: Honourable Mr Justice P. Velmurugan
Decided On: Jan 31, 2025
Case Number: CRL OP/2488/2025

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Lakshmi

Respondent

The State Rep by Its,

Excerpt

.....within a time limit that may be fixed by this court. for petitioner : mr.t.shunmuga rajeswaran for respondents: mr.s.vinoth kumar, govt. advocate (crl. side)orderthis petition is filed to grant necessary direction to iii additional district and sessions judge, dharapuram to complete the trial in s.c.no.53 of 2022 within a time limit that may be fixed by this court. page no.1/42. in view of the direction of the honourable supreme court andconsidering the fact that, since thousands of cases are pending in the courts and the litigants are awaiting in a long queue, the hon'ble supreme court in the case of sangram sadashiv suryavanshi vs. the state of maharashtra in criminal appeal no.4758 of 2024, dated 25.11.2024, had observed that the high courts are fixing time-bound schedule for conclusion of trial in a routine manner, despite the decision of the constitution bench of the supreme court in the case of high court bar association, allahabad vs. state of uttar pradesh, reported in(2024) 6 scc 267, which reads as under:"47.3. constitutional courts, in the ordinary course, should refrain from fixing a time-bound schedule for the disposal of cases pending before any other courts. constitutional courts may issue directions for the time-bound disposal of cases only in exceptional circumstances. the issue of prioritising the disposal of cases should be best left to the decision of the courts concerned where the cases are pending."3. in view of the above direction of the honourable supreme court, no time limit could be fixed for completion of trial by the trial court. hence, this petition is dismissed. cs page no.2/4 to1. the inspector of police, (cr.no.1201 of 2021)2. the public prosecutor, high court, madras. page no.3/4 p.velmurugan, j cs page no.4/4

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Dated: 31.01.2025
Coram:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.VELMURUGAN --- Lakshmi .. Petitioner Vs The Inspector of Police, (Cr.No.1201 of 2021) .. Respondent Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 528 of the BNSS to grant necessary direction directing the III Additional District and Sessions Judge, Dharapuram to complete the trial in S.C.No.53 of 2022 within a time limit that may be fixed by this Court. For petitioner : Mr.T.Shunmuga Rajeswaran For respondents: Mr.S.Vinoth Kumar, Govt. Advocate (Crl. Side)

ORDER

This petition is filed to grant necessary direction to III Additional District and Sessions Judge, Dharapuram to complete the trial in S.C.No.53 of 2022 within a time limit that may be fixed by this Court. Page No.1/4

2. In view of the direction of the Honourable Supreme Court and

considering the fact that, since thousands of cases are pending in the Courts and the litigants are awaiting in a long queue, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sangram Sadashiv Suryavanshi Vs. The State of Maharashtra in Criminal Appeal No.4758 of 2024, dated 25.11.2024, had observed that the High Courts are fixing time-bound schedule for conclusion of trial in a routine manner, despite the decision of the Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court in the case of High Court Bar Association, Allahabad vs. State of Uttar Pradesh, reported in

(2024) 6 SCC 267, which reads as under:

"47.3. Constitutional courts, in the ordinary course, should refrain from fixing a time-bound schedule for the disposal of cases pending before any other courts. Constitutional courts may issue directions for the time-bound disposal of cases only in exceptional circumstances. The issue of prioritising the disposal of cases should be best left to the decision of the courts concerned where the cases are pending."

3. In view of the above direction of the Honourable Supreme Court, no time limit could be fixed for completion of trial by the trial Court. Hence, this petition is dismissed. cs Page No.2/4 To

1. The Inspector of Police, (Cr.No.1201 of 2021)

2. The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras. Page No.3/4 P.VELMURUGAN, J cs Page No.4/4

Same Court & Year Chennai Orders · 2025 Same Parties Lakshmi vs The State Rep by Its, Same Judge Honourable Mr Justice P. Velmurugan