Maheshwari v. State Rep.By Its, Inspector Of Police,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 31.07.2025 CORAM :

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.VELMURUGAN Maheshwari

...Petitioner

Vs.

1. State represented by The Inspector of Police, Maduravoyal Police Station, Chennai - 600 095.

(Crime No.628/2015)

2. Ravi

...Respondents

Prayer : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 528 of BNSS to direct the District Mahila Court (Fast Track Court), Tiruvallur, Tiruvallur District, to complete the trial in S.C.No.125 of 2020 pending on its file within the time frame as fixed by this Court. For Petitioner : Mr.A.Suresh Sakthi Murugan For Respondents : Dr.C.E.Pratap, Government Advocate (Crl.Side) for R1 1/5

ORDER

This petition has been filed seeking directions to the District Mahila Court (Fast Track Court) Tiruvallur, to complete trial in S.C.No.125 of 2020 within the stipulated time to be fixed by this Court. According to learned counsel for the petitioner the second respondent/accused is purposefully prolonging the trial without cross examining the witnesses, since this Court at the time of refusing to grant bail to the accused, vide its order dated 04.04.2025, observed that if the trial is not completed within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, the accused shall renew the bail petition. Therefore the accused is wantonly dragging the trial to obtain bail. Hence directions to the Court below is necessary to complete the trial as early as possible.

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) for the first respondent and perused the materials available on record.

It is seen from the adjudication order of the Court 2/5

below in S.C.No.125 of 2020 that despite witnesses present, the counsel for defence refused to cross examine and hence it is clear that the accused is protracting the trial wantonly. Further, this Court, by order dated 04.04.2025, while refusing to grant bail to the second respondent/accused, considering the serious nature of offence committed by him, observed that if the trial is not completed within a period of two months the accused shall renew the bail petition before this Court. Therefore, taking advantage of the above order, the accused is prolonging the trial without any valid reason. Resultantly the trial Court could not complete the trial in S.C.No.125 of 2020 because of non-cooperation of the second respondent/accused. Therefore the trial Court is directed to complete trial in S.C.No.

125 of 2020 and dispose of the same within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. If the second respondent/accused is not co-operating for trial, the trial Court is directed to dispose of the case within the stipulated time by appointing legal aid counsel.

dispose of the case in S.C.No.125 of 2020 within the stipulated time, since the offence involved in this case is double murder that too minor children of the accused and the petitioner herein.

With the above directions, this Criminal Original Petition stands disposed of.

31.07.2025 cgi Speaking /Non-speaking order To

1. The District Mahila Court (Fast Track Court), Tiruvallur, Tiruvallur District.

2. The Inspector of Police, Maduravoyal Police Station, Chennai - 600 095.

3. The Public Prosecutor, Madras High Court.

4/5

P.VELMURUGAN, J.

cgi 31.07.2025 5/5