Mallayya vs State

K.N. Phaneendra, J.—The Station Bazaar Police submitted a charge sheet against the petitioners for the offences punishable under Sections 419 and 420 r/w. 34 of IPC.

There is no need for this Court to go in detail with regard to the facts of this case, as the petitioners have approached this Court on several occasions and this Court has rejected their petition for quashing of the proceedings before the Trial Court.

This petition is filed seeking a direction to the Trial Court to close evidence on the side of the prosecution within one month from the date of summons to the witnesses or to quash the proceedings.

So far as quashing of the proceedings is concerned, repeatedly, the petitioners had been approaching this Court. It virtually amounts to abusing the process of the Court, when this Court has on three occasions expressed that the proceedings cannot be quashed, in spite of that the petitioners have once again called upon this Court to quash the proceedings. Such a prayer, in my opinion, requires to be met with an iron hand. It is submitted by the learned counsel that the Trial Court is not speeding-up the proceedings though the Trial Court has issued summons and warrants against the prosecution witnesses, but, the witnesses are not showing any interest to come before the Court and lead any evidence against the petitioners and such attitude of the prosecution witnesses is causing great inconvenience to the petitioners.

On a careful perusal of the order sheet of the Trial Court, it shows that, on 03.08.2013 charges were framed against the accused and the witness summons were ordered to C.W. 1. But, in spite of issuance of process against C.W. 1, it appears the prosecution has not produced C.W. 1 before the Court. On 23.12.2013, NBW was issued to C.W. 1 and subsequently warrants have been issued to C.Ws. 1 to 5. In spite of that, the trial is not yet begun. This also clearly shows the lethargic attitude on the part the prosecution in not producing the witnesses before the Court.

Speedy trial is the fundamental right of the accused persons. Of course, I can understand that due to the heavy load of the Court such things happen, under such circumstances, if the Court is not inclined to take-up the matter due to the work load of the Court. But, in this particular case, since 03.08.2013 summons and warrants though being issued against the prosecution witnesses, the Court could not secure the presence of the prosecution witnesses. Therefore, it is just and necessary for this Court to direct the Trial Court to expedite the matter and issue coercive steps against the prosecution witnesses and also get the presence of the Investigating Officer and warn him that if he does not turn-up with the prosecution witnesses, he has to face serious consequences. The Court is not disabled from exercising its powers to get the witnesses by coercive actions. If the concerned police does not act swiftly, the Court has to secure their presence by directing the higher officers of the concerned police, to secure the presence of the witnesses. Therefore, the Trial Court is hereby directed to expedite the trial.

Though this Court is directing the Trial Court to expedite the trial, it does not mean that the petitioners can approach this Court for quashing of the proceedings once again without any changed circumstances, as, I have narrated that it amounts to abuse of the process of the Court. Therefore, though this Court is allowing the petition, but, it is the dismissal of the petition, so far as prayer of quashing the proceedings, is concerned with cost of Rs. 2000/-. Accordingly, the petition stands disposed of.

The office is directed to send a copy of this order to the jurisdictional Magistrate and also to the Superintendent of Police, Gulbarga, to properly guide the jurisdictional police to secure the presence of the prosecution witnesses and produce them before the Court.

The cost amount shall be deposited by the petitioners before the Legal Services Committed, High Court of Karnataka, Kalaburagi Bench.