Avelino Pinto vs President Children's Court & Anr.

Bharat P. Deshpande, J

By way of present petition, the petitioner is praying for writ of mandamus against the President of Children's Court with the following prayers:

“(a) This Hon'ble Court be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or such other appropriate writ or an order as this Hon'ble Court deems fit and direct the respondent no.1 to entertain the application stamped under no.4/2022 and along with its accompanying documents and dispose it off in accordance with law.

(b) Pending hearing and final disposal of this Petition the cross examination of Investigation Office may be deferred.”

Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor Shri Pravin Faldessai for the State.

After perusing the contents in the petition and the documents attached, it seems that the petitioner himself is not aware in which matter he is asking for the relief. Petition shows that Special Case No.2/2004 is pending before the President, Children's Court and some application was filed in it which is at page 92. However, it is clear from roznama dated 22.09.2022 in Special Case No.2/2004 that the matter was adjourned for final arguments and kept on 17.10.2022.

The record further shows that Criminal Writ Petitions were filed by the present petitioner bearing numbers Criminal Writ Petition Nos.536/2021(f), Criminal Misc. Application Nos.166/2022(f), 189/2022(f), 229/2022(f), 537/2021(f) and 811/2021(f), which were disposed of by the learned Single Judge of this Court vide order dated 05.09.2022. In the said matters also it has been clearly observed in para 9 that the petitioner is filing such applications and petitions only to delay the matters before the trial Court.

The prayer clause in the present petition is vague and does not show in which matter the petitioner filed an application for production of additional documents as alleged. However, it is seen from the record that such application was tried to be presented in case no.2/2004, which is already fixed for final arguments.

The learned Additional Public Prosecutor pointed out that it is an attempt to delay the trial Court matter and, therefore, such attempt should be rejected by imposing costs.

We have seen the orders passed by this Court in the earlier petitions wherein such observations are found in paragraph nos.9 & 10. Similarly, in Criminal Writ Petition No.21/2017 decided on 27.02.2017, Sessions Case No.9/2008 was transferred from Mapusa Court to Children's Court to be taken along with Special Case No.2/2004 at the request of the petitioner himself.

Considering the prayer clauses, we are not inclined to accept such prayers as writ of mandamus against a judicial officer is not at all maintainable. Since this is an attempt to delay trial which is pending from the year 2004, we are inclined to impose costs on the petitioner which is quantified at ₹10,000/- to be paid in the office of the Goa State Legal Services Authority within a period of one week from today.

Criminal Writ Petition is, therefore, dismissed, with cost of Rs.10,000/- to be deposited in the office of the Goa State Legal Services Authority within one week.