Shine Mohan vs Sub Divisional Magistrate/ Sub ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 9531 Ker

             IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                  PRESENT
        THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
  TUESDAY, THE 5TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2023 / 14TH BHADRA, 1945
                         OP(CRL.) NO. 597 OF 2023
AGAINST THE ORDER IN MP 5/2023 OF SUB DIVISIONAL MAGISTRATE,
                                 OTTAPPALAM
PETITIONER:

             SHINE MOHAN, AGED 39 YEARS
             S/O. KRISHNA MOHAN, THALAPULLY HOUSE, P.O.
             THRIKKATIRI, OTTAPALAM TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT,
             PIN - 679502
             BY ADVS.
             P.JAYARAM
             P.B.AJOY
             K.R.PAUL


RESPONDENTS:

    1        SUB DIVISIONAL MAGISTRATE/ SUB COLLECTOR, OFFICE OF
             THE SUB DIVISIONAL MAGISTRATE, COURT ROAD, P.O.
             OTTAPALAM, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN - 679101
    2        GOPINATHAN, AGED 27 YEARS
             S/O T.K. UNNI, THALAPULLY HOUSE, P.O. THRIKKATIRI,
             OTTAPALAM TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN - 679502
OTHER PRESENT:

             RENJITH T.R, PP


     THIS     OP    (CRIMINAL)   HAVING     COME    UP   FOR    ADMISSION   ON
05.09.2023,        THE   COURT   ON   THE    SAME    DAY       DELIVERED    THE
FOLLOWING:
 O.P(Crl) 597/2023                            2




                   P. V. KUNHIKRISHNAN, J.

-------------------------------------------

O.P(Crl).No.597 of 2023

------------------------------------------- Dated this the 5th day of September, 2023

JUDMENT

The above original petition is filed with the following prayers:

i) Direct the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Ottapalam to expedite Exhibit P1 proceedings and pass final order thereon soon within a definite time frame.

ii) Grant such other reliefs as this Honourable Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case including the one exempting the petitioners from producing the English translation of the vernacular documents/Exhibits.

[SIC]

2. Admittedly a proceedings under Section 133 Cr.P.C is

initiated as evident by Ext.P1. The grievance of the petitioner is that

it is not concluded by the 1st respondent as per the provisions of the

Cr.P.C.

3. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned

Public Prosecutor. No notice is necessary to the 2 nd respondent

because of the way in which this original petition is going to be

disposed of.

4. The only grievance of the petitioner is that, even though a

proceedings under Section 133 Cr.P.C is initiated by the 1 st

respondent, the same is not concluded in accordance to law. I think

there can be a direction to the 1st respondent to conclude the

proceedings in accordance to law, as expeditiously as possible, at any

rate within three months after giving an opportunity of hearing to the

petitioner and the 2nd respondent.

Therefore, this original petition is disposed of with the

following directions:

(i) The 1st respondent will conclude the proceedings initiated based on Ext.P1, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

(ii) Before passing final orders, the 1 st respondent will give an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, 2nd respondent and other affected parties, if any.

Sd/-

P. V. KUNHIKRISHNAN JUDGE Sbna/

APPENDIX OF OP(CRL.) 597/2023

PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE CONDITIONAL ORDER DATED 24/04/2023 U/S 133 (1) (D) OF THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE ISSUED BY THE SUB DIVISIONAL MAGISTRATE, OTTAPALAM Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 21/01/2023 PRESENTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE SUB COLLECTOR, OTTAPALAM Exhibit P2 (a) TRUE COPY OF RECEIPT DATED 21/01/2023 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER FROM THE OFFICE OF THE SUB COLLECTOR,