HARENDRA SINGH Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
Harendra Singh and Ors.
State of Uttarakhand and Anr.
Click here to view full judgement.
Umesh Chandra Dhyani, J. -
(1.) BY means of this petition moved under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the applicants/petitioners seek to:
(a) Expedite the hearing of criminal case No. 532 of 2011 pending before Chief Judicial Magistrate, Haridwar, captioned as State v. Rijwan & others under Sections 147, 148, 435, 427 IPC and Section 3 of the Prevention of Damages to Public Property Act, 1984, PS Kotwali Haridwar,
(b) Lower court records of criminal case No. 532 of 2011 pending before Chief Judicial Magistrate, Haridwar, captioned as State v. Rijwan & others under Sections 147, 148, 435, 427 IPC and Section 3 of the Prevention of Damages to Public Property Act, 1984, PS Kotwali Haridwar in case crime No. 180 of 2010 summoned in C -482 Petition No. 105 of 2012, pending before this High Court be returned.
It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that opposite party No. 2 lodged an FIR alleging that on 03.05.2008 when the results of 2008 batch students for first professional course was declared, in which 50 % of the students were successful then they, on 04.05.2010, at about 10:45 a.m. opposed this and damaged the furniture kept in the rooms of faculties and caused damage to the window panes and put on fire the scooter of Dr. S.S. Kedar and damaged the Motorcycle of Dr. R.B. Shukla, and on this an FIR in crime No. 180 of 2010 against the applicants under Sections 147, 148, 435, 427 IPC and Section 3 of the Prevention of Damages to Public Property Act, 1984, was registered in PS Kotwali Haridwar and thereafter, a charge -sheet was submitted against the applicants being charge -sheet No. 372 of 2010. The applicants along with two others accused were not named in the FIR.
(2.) IT is further submitted that on 09.02.2011, learned trial court took the cognizance of the offence and since then innumerable dates have been fixed. Applicants appear before the trial court on the dates fixed, but no proceedings take place, as the record of learned trial court is summoned by this Hon'ble Court. The applicants are suffering, as the complete proceedings of the trial are held up. The applicants are the students of final year of Medical course BAMS and are likely to pass out this year. If the trial is not concluded promptly then the applicants will be forced to come back to Haridwar to face the trial after leaving the cities of their future job. Learned counsel further contended that expeditious disposal of the case is right of the petitioners as it is integral part of right to live as enshrined in the Article 21 of the Constitution of India. By way of this petition/application, the petitioners seek timely justice so that they may not be denied their legal and fundamental rights.
(3.) THE relief, as sought for by the petitioners/applicants, is innocuous and therefore, this Court does not feel it necessary to issue notice to the private respondent i.e. respondent No. 2, in as much as, everybody, who is party to a lis must be interested in early disposal of the case, be it the petitioner/plaintiff/informant or the respondent/defendant/accused. Further since no prejudice will be caused to respondent No. 2, hence the issuance of notice to the respondent No. 2 is dispensed with.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.