Bombay High Court
Shaikh Javed Abdul Sattar vs The State Of Maharashtra on 2 February, 2024
2024:BHC-AUG:2484
3650.2023APPLN
-1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
88 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 3650 OF 2023
SHAIKH JAVED ABDUL SATTAR
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
...
Advocate for Applicant : Mr. G. D. Jain (appointed through Legal Aid)
APP for Respondent/State : Mr. Satish A. Gaikwad
.....
CORAM : SANJAY A. DESHMUKH, J.
DATED : 2nd FEBRUARY, 2024.
PER COURT :-
. This is an application for quashing the order passed by the
learned Additional Sessions Judge, Parbhani in Sessions Case
No.36 of 2014 below Exhibit-107. The learned trial Court in paras 9,
10 and 11 has observed as under : -
"09. In view of the advice sought from the Court
as per Exh. 107 prayer by the accused by the present
application, it would be necessary for the accused to
take the legal assistance from the office of the defence
counsel, which has been established as per the
directions of the Hon'ble High Court and the ld. Chief
Legal Aid Defence Counsel Shri. G.R. Selukar is
present before the Court.
10. I also give a task ld. Chief Legal Aid
Defence Counsel to convince the accused-in-person,
if it possible by taking endeavour to give
understanding about what is necessity about
3650.2023APPLN
examination of defence witnesses and when it is
necessary to examine defence witnesses & whether
really it is necessary to examine 27 defence witnesses
as accused in person wants to examine.
11. With these observations, I disposed of
Exh. 107 accordingly. Hence, matter be fixed on
10.08.2023, after 09.08.2023 as transfer petition
second time moved before the Hon'ble P.D.J.
Parbhani. Hence, accused-in-person to engage an
advocate or take the assistance of the Legal Aid
Defence Counsel. This Court has passed the order as
per directives of the Hon'ble High Court, which has
been explained to the accused in Marathi and Hindi
language. However, accused adamantly said that he
does not want to engage advocate & he wants to
conduct trial in person only."
2. The learned advocate for the applicant submitted that the
applicant is expecting to conduct his case on his own and he is not
willing to take the legal assistance from the defence counsel to be
appointed through Chief Legal Aid Defence Department of Parbhani
Court.
3. The learned APP strongly opposed the application.
4. Perused the application at Exhibit-107. The applicant has
prayed for guidance from the Court for submitting 65B certificate in
support of memory card. The learned trial Court has observed so
3650.2023APPLN
many things showing the conduct of this applicant that he is not able
to conduct his case. It is also observed that even prosecution has not
examined 27 defence witnesses and this applicant is willing to
examine 27 witnesses. This is nothing but deliberate attempt to
prolong the case, which is pending in the Court of Additional
Sessions Judge, Parbhani since 2014. Applicant has habit to file such
applications in this Court. Criminal Application No.4019 of 2022 was
also filed without any justification which was rejected by this Court on
11.01.2023.
5. Considering all these reasons, the order passed by the
learned trial Court is legal and correct and does not require
interference. The application for quashing the said order sans merit.
There is no any illegality and perversity in the impugned order. The
judicial discretion is exercised by the trial Court. There is not at all
any substance, the application, therefore, deserves to be rejected. It
is rejected accordingly. Considering all these aspects, it would be
proper to saddle exemplary costs of Rs.2,000/- to be deposited in the
District Services Sub-Committee, Parbhani by this applicant within
one month from today. If it is not deposited the trial Court shall
proceed as per law.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, it
seems that the applicant has caused delay for trial and also by this
application without any justification the trial is held up from 2014.
3650.2023APPLN
Recently, the Hon'ble Supreme Court issued directions to the trial
Court to conduct old cases of 5-10 years etc., within one year. The
applicant is causing hurdle in deciding Sessions Case No.36 of 2014
and also proceeded to file this application without any justification.
The Sessions Case must be tried in terms of wording that "Once it is
started, it shall not be stopped." In such circumstances, if the
applicant is not willing to engage an advocate and in future he may
pray for the same, therefore, it is in the interest of this applicant to
appoint Lawyer. The learned Trial Court is, therefore, requested to
appoint Lawyer on behalf of this applicant to conduct his case, but in
any case, he shall not be permitted to conduct the trial in-person.
7. The learned trial Court is also requested to conduct the trial
as expeditiously as possible by keeping it at least twice in a week and
dispose it of on merits. The trial Court shall not get influenced by the
observations made by this Court in this order while finally deciding
the case on merits at the time of judgment.
8. If the applicant is not cooperating to the trial Court for
conducting the trial, the trial Court may after giving an opportunity to
the applicant decide on merits as to whether his bail bond should be
cancelled or not without reference to this Court.
9. This Court appreciates the sincere efforts taken by learned
appointed advocate Mr.G.D. Jain for applicant. His fees be paid
3650.2023APPLN
through the High Court Legal Services Sub-Committee, Aurangabad
as per the rules.
(SANJAY A. DESHMUKH, J.)
sga
