AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
This Criminal Petition is filed seeking to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.256 of 2018 on the file of the learned XIII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Nampally at Hyderabad.
Heard M/s. P. Vamsheedhar Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr.Jithender Rao Veeramalla, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent No.1.
With their consent, this Criminal Petition is disposed of at the stage of admission on the ground that the learned counsel for the petitioners has restricted the relief to dispense with the presence of the petitioner Nos.2 and 3, who are senior citizens and seeking a direction to the learned trial Court to conclude the trial and dispose of the case by fixing time limit. The petitioners are not seeking any relief much less any effective relief against respondent No.2 Hence notice in respect of respondent No.2 is dispensed with.
Though the present criminal petition has been filed seeking to quash the proceedings against the petitioners/accused Nos.1 to 3 in C.C.No.256 of 2018 on the file of the learned XIII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Nampally at Hyderabad, by raising various grounds, however, during the course of hearing, learned counsel for the petitioners restricted his relief requesting this Court to dispense with the appearance of the petitioners/accused Nos.2 and 3 in C.C.No.256 of 2018, on the file of the learned XIII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Nampally at Hyderabad, on the ground that the petitioner No.2 is 69 years old and suffering from old age ailments and petitioner No.3 is a housewife and a senior citizen. Learned counsel for the petitioners further submitted that the petitioner Nos.2 and 3 will appear before the learned trial Court whenever their presence is required and that they will represent the matter through their counsel on each and every date of adjournment. He further submitted that though the learned trial Court taken cognizance as long as in the year 2018, the petitioners have been prosecuting the proceedings before the learned trial Court, but due to the non-cooperation of respondent No.2 – De facto complainant, the learned trial Court is adjourning the matter from time to time. Unless this Court directs the trial Court to conclude the trial and for disposal of the said C.C., the petitioner will be put to great hardship.
Per contra, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of respondent No.1 has not opposed the dispense with the presence of petitioner Nos.2 and 3, insofar as the expedite disposal of the case is concerned, and further submitted that several old cases are pending before the trial Court and the petitioner is not entitled to seek fixation of a time limit for disposal of C.C.No.256 of 2018.
Having considered the rival submissions made by the respective parties and upon perusal of the material available on record, the presence of petitioner/accused Nos.2 and 3 before the learned XIII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Nampally at Hyderabad, in C.C.No.256 of 2018 is dispensed with, subject to the condition that the petitioner/accused Nos.2 and 3 shall be represented through their counsel on each and every date of adjournment. If the presence of the petitioner/accused Nos.1 to 3 is required, they shall appear before the trial Court. In case of their non-appearance on the specific date fixed by the trial Court for their appearance, the trial Court is entitled to proceed with the matter, in accordance with law. However, the learned XIII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Nampally at Hyderabad, is directed to conclude the trial and dispose of C.C. No.256 of 2018 as expeditiously as possible. It is made clear that the parties in lis shall cooperate with the trial Court for disposal of C.C. No.256 of 2018 without seeking undue adjournments.
Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is disposed of.
Miscellaneous applications, pending if any, shall stand closed.