Sabeer Khan vs State Of Kerala
2024 Latest Caselaw 12923 Ker

Kerala High Court

Sabeer Khan vs State Of Kerala on 22 May, 2024

Author: Bechu Kurian Thomas

Bench: Bechu Kurian Thomas

             IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                PRESENT
          THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS
     WEDNESDAY, THE 22ND DAY OF MAY 2024 / 1ST JYAISHTA, 1946
                        OP(CRL.) NO. 395 OF 2024
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED IN CC NO.168 OF 2020 OF JUDICIAL
                MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS, CHITTUR
                     ..............................


PETITIONER/ACCUSED NOS. 1 & 2 :



    1     SABEER KHAN, AGED 37 YEARS
          S/O SHAHUL HAMEED, KARUVAPPARA,
          KOZHINJAMPARA PO, PALAKKAD., PIN - 678 555.
    2     A.SUBEESH, AGED 32 YEARS
          S/O ABDUL AZEEZ M. SHOURAMMA MANZIL,
          KOZHINJAMPARA PO, PALAKKAD., PIN - 678 555.
          BY ADVS.
          SAJAN VARGHEESE K.
          LIJU. M.P


RESPONDENT/STATE :

          STATE OF KERALA
          REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
          HIGH COURT OF KERALA,
          ERNAKULAM., PIN - 682 031.



          SRI. RENJITH T.R. (PP)


THIS OP (CRIMINAL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22.05.2024, THE
COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 OP(CRL.) NO. 395 OF 2024

                                               2


                            BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J
                      ......................................................
                              O.P.(Crl.) No.395 of 2024
                       ...................................................
                      Dated this the 22nd day of May, 2024


                                       JUDGMENT

Petitioners seek for an expeditious disposal of C.C.No.168/2020

pending on the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court,

Chittur; in a time bound manner.

2. Sri.Sajan Vargheese K., the learned counsel for petitioners, submitted

that petitioners are about to receive a work visa for employment

abroad, and therefore, pendency of the case would cause prejudice to

them. Hence, they seek a speedy disposal of the pending case.

3. The Supreme Court has time and again observed that the

Constitutional Courts must in the ordinary course restrain itself from

issuing directions for a time bound disposal of cases pending before

the trial courts. [Reference to the decision in High Court Bar

Association, Allahabad v. State of UP & others [2024 INSC 150] is

appropriate]. If a direction is issued by this Court, it will be

overlooking the priority of other cases. Therefore, the relief sought

for is only to be declined.

OP(CRL.) NO. 395 OF 2024

4. However, if any request for an out of turn priority is sought for by

petitioners, the learned Magistrate will be at liberty to consider the

request, notwithstanding the disinclination of this Court to issue any

directions in that regard.

With the above observations, this original petition is dismissed.

sd/-

BECHU KURIAN THOMAS JUDGE AMV/24/05/2024 OP(CRL.) NO. 395 OF 2024

APPENDIX OF OP(CRL.) 395/2024

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO.416/2019 OF KOZHINJAMPARA POLICE STATION.

EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO.419/2019 OF KOZHINJAPARA POLICE STATION.

EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE E-COURT DETAILS OF THE CC NO.168/2020 ON THE FILE OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, CHITTUR.

EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE E-COURT DETAILS OF THE CC NO.187/2020 ON THE FILE OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, CHITTUR.

TRUE COPY