V.Murugan v. The State Rep By The Inspector Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 23.06.2025 Coram:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.VELMURUGAN V.Murugan ... Petitioner Vs.

1. The State represented by The Inspector of Police Crime Branch-Crime Investigation Department Police Station Puducherry

2. Malarviji 3.The Special Investigation Team (SIT) Represented through its head the Senior Superintendent of Police, CBCID Puducherry ... Respondents Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 528 of B.N.S.S., to issue suitable directions to the trial Court that is the Chief Judicial Magistrate Puducherry in respect of the C.C.No.9/2017 to complete the trial within a time frame fixed by this Court or to conduct the trial on day to day basis. 1/6

For Petitioner : Mr.Parthiban Patmanabane For Respondents 1 and 3 : Mr.K.S.Mohandass Public Prosecutor (Puducherry) Assisted by Mrs.N.Danalatchumy Advocate

ORDER

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed by the petitioner to issue suitable directions to the trial Court i.e. the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Puducherry, to complete the trial in C.C.No.9/2017 within a time frame or to conduct the trial on day to day basis.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor (Puducherry) appearing for the respondents 1 and 3 and also perused the materials available on record.

3. Since no adverse order is being passed against the 2 nd respondent, notice to the 2 nd respondent is dispensed with.

4. It is seen that based on the applications filed by the petitioner, this 2/6

Court vide orders dated 18.03.2020 and 11.07.2022, had already given directions to the trial Court to dispose of the case within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of the order. However, the parties, in one way or other way, protracting the case at every stage and went upto the Hon'ble Apex Court and thereafter has came back to the trial Court. Once again the petitioner has approached this Court by filing the present petition seeking direction to complete the trial within a stipulated time.

5. Every time this Court cannot give a direction to the trial Court for disposal of the case and pressurise the trial Court to give priority to a particular case. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sangram Sadashiv Suryavanshi Vs. The State of Maharashtra in Criminal Appeal No.4758 of 2024 dated 25.11.2024 has observed that the High Courts are fixing a timebound schedule for conclusion of the trials in a routine manner despite the decisions of the Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court in the case of High Court Bar Association, Allahabad vs. State of Uttar Pradesh reported in 3/6

(2024) 6 SCC 267, which reads as under:

"47.3. constitutional courts, in the ordinary course, should refrain from fixing a time-bound schedule for the disposal of cases pending before any other courts. Constitutional courts may issue directions for the time-bound disposal of cases only in exceptional circumstances. The issue of prioritising the disposal of cases should be best left to the decision of the courts concerned where the cases are pending."

6. Therefore, this Court is not inclined to give any direction as sought for by the petitioner.

7. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. 23.06.2025 Index : Yes / No Speaking Order : Yes / No ksa-2 4/6

To

1. The Chief Judicial Magistrate Puducherry

2. The Inspector of Police Crime Branch-Crime Investigation Department Police Station Puducherry

3. The Senior Superintendent of Police, CBCID The Special Investigation Team (SIT) Puducherry

4. The Public Prosecutor (Puducherry) High Court of Madras 5/6

P.VELMURUGAN,J.

Ksa-2 23.06.2025 6/6