Anil S/O. Ganjidhar Pawar v. Tukaram Vithal Chaudhari And ANR

-1-

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD 920 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.4035 OF 2019 ANIL S/O. GANJIDHAR PAWAR

VERSUS

TUKARAM VITHAL CHAUDHARI AND OTHERS ......

Mr. Anil Ganjidhar Pawar, Applicant in person Mr. M. R. Wagh, Advocate for Respondent No.1 Mr. K. S. Patil, APP for Respondent No.2-State .....

CORAM : V. K. JADHAV AND SHRIKANT D. KULKARNI, JJ.

DATED : 28th SEPTEMBER, 2021 PER COURT:- 1.

Learned counsel for respondent no.1 tendered across the bar an affidavit-in-reply. The same is taken on record. A copy of the same is already given to the applicant who appeared in person. 2.

Heard.

3.

Learned counsel for respondent no.1-original informant submits that at present the trial court has framed the charge and posted the case for evidence.

-24.

The party in person submits that this is the case of the year 2012. The party in person is attending the court dates since filing of the charge-sheet before the trial court. However, the informant alongwith the witnesses never appeared before the trial court even though the charge was framed way back in the year 2016. 5.

Learned counsel appearing for respondent no.1-informant submits that the informant has attended the court dates before the trial court.

6.

The party in person submits that if the necessary directions are given to the trial court for expeditious hearing of the case, preferably by day to day hearing, the party in person would not press this application. The party in person submits that he is a handicapped person and as such, it is difficult for him to attend the court dates every time. The party in person submits that even though he has submitted an application for providing him a chair, however, the trial court has not passed any order on it. The party in person thus seeks leave to withdraw this application. 7.

Leave granted. The application is disposed off as withdrawn.

-38.

The trial court is hereby directed to decide the case bearing R.C.C. No. 518 of 2012 as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of three months from the date of this order, by day to day hearing if possible, and submit weekly progress report to the Principal District Judge of the District Court. (SHRIKANT D. KULKARNI, J.) (V. K. JADHAV, J.) vre