AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Instant application seeking leave of this Court for filing the application No.CrlM No.32/2021 without annexing/depositing the requisite court fee, in
view of the grounds urged therein, is allowed. The petitioner shall deposit the requisite court fee/affidavit/stamps with the Registry of this Court within
a period of one week from the date Registry starts functioning normally.
Application is disposed of.
This is an application filed by the petitioner seeking recall of the order dated 23rd of November, 2020, passed by this Court in CRMC No.164/2016,
whereby 561-A Cr. P. C petition of the petitioner has been dismissed for non-prosecution.
Recall of the order dated 23rd of November, 2020, has been sought by the petitioner on two counts: (1) that the Court hearing a quashment petition
under Section 561-A Cr. P. C is not competent to dismiss the same for non-prosecution and since the petition has been dismissed under no provision
of law, as such, the same deserves to be restored; and (2) that the petitioner was prevented by a sufficient cause to appear in the matter when the
same was called out.
Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner apart from making efforts for making out a case for restoration also submitted that he would be
pressing his 561-A petition only with regard to seeking of a direction to the trial court to expedite the trial.
Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the record, I am of the view that the petitioner has made out a case for recall of the
order dated 23rd November, 2020. Accordingly, the instant application is allowed and CRMC No.164/2016 is restored to its original number.
In this petition, the petitioner has challenged FIR No.143/2013 registered against the petitioner in Police Station, Achabal for commission of
offences under Section 279, 338, 304-A RPC, 3/181 and 134 of Motor Vehicles Act.
Learned counsel for the petitioner fairly submits that the FIR after investigation has been challaned in the competent court of law and the same is
proceeding in the matter. He, however, submits that the pace with which the trial is being conducted by the trial court is not satisfactory and it will
take years for the trial to conclude. The petitioner, learned counsel submits, is only 32 years old and in case the matter is not decided by the trial court
at the earliest, he would suffer an irreparable loss. He, therefore, submits that the petitioner would feel satisfied if this petition is disposed of with a
direction to the trial court to conclude the trial at the earliest preferably within a period of four months.
Having considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner, I am of the view that no fixed timeline can be given to the trial court
to conclude the trial. The pace of the trial depends upon numerous factors like number of witnesses to be examined, cooperation of the prosecution as
also of the defence etc. Accordingly, this petition, which is otherwise devoid of any merit, is disposed of and the trial court conducting the trial in the
instant matter is requested to expeditiously conclude the same.