This is an application filed by the petitioner who is the accused in C.C. 356/2013 pending before Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Devikulam seeking for a speedy disposal under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.
2. It is alleged in the petition that the petitioner is a Civil Police Officer working at Thoppumpady Police Station. He was arrayed as third accused in O.R. No.257/2005 registered by the Deputy Forest Ranger, Forest Station Marayoor along with other accused persons. He has been implicated as accused on the basis of the statement given by the first accused in the case. Since he was arrayed as accused in the case, he was suspended from service as per Ext.P1 Order. Thereafter, he was reinstated in service after one year consequent to the filing of Ext.P5 report by the Investigating Officer in respect of this case before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Devikulam. Thereafter, he was transferred out of Idukki District and posted at various places in Ernakulam District. On account of the pendency of this case, his suspension period, promotions and increments were not regularized. The disciplinary proceedings initiated against him was also not finalised in view of the pendency of the criminal case. Even, the final report was filed, as per Ext.P11 judgment of this Court, directing the Investigating Officer to complete the investigation and file final report within two months and it is thereafter that the final report was filed and the case was taken on file as C.C. 356/2013 and now pending before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Devikulam. It is now posted to 31.05.2014. Since this is a case of 2013, there is no possibility of the case being taken up in the near future, though the crime was registered in the year 2005. So the petitioner has no other remedy except to approach this Court seeking the following reliefs:
“a) issue an order or direction commanding the Judicial First Class Magistrates Court, Devikulam to take immediate steps to try and dispose of C.C. No.356/2013 pending before it within a time frame.
b) to issue such other and further orders as are deemed just and necessary in the facts and circumstances of the case.”
3. On the basis of the reliefs claimed in the petition, this court felt that the petition can be disposed of at the admission stage itself after hearing the counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor and also on getting a report from the concerned Court regarding the present stage of the case. Accordingly, a report has been called for from the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Devikulam. The learned Magistrate has sent a report which reads as follows:
“I most humbly submit that C.C. No.356/2013 pending before this Court was taken on file on the basis of the charge sheet vide O.R. No.257/2005 filed by Deputy Range Officer, Marayoor Forest Range. There are altogether three accused in this case.
Upon issuing summons to the accused, accused nos.3 appeared and took bail. A1 and A2 have not appeared and consequently warrant has been issued against them and the case is now posted to 10.07.2014.
The prosecution has cited 7 witnesses to be examined in this case. All of them are official witnesses. If accused nos.1 and 2 appear on the next posting date i.e., 10.06.2014 or if accused nos. 1 and 2 fails to appear on that day and the case against them is split up and the case against accused no.3 is proceeded with, in the normal course I expect that the case could be disposed of within six months from 10.7.2014. However, if the defence also intends to adduce evidence a further time of 2-3 months more will normally be required to dispose of the case.”
4. The counsel for the petitioner submitted that though the crime was registered in the year 2005, the final report was filed only in the year 2013. After the registration of the crime, he was suspended for some time and later he was reinstated and he was transferred outside Idukki District and he is working in Ernakulam District for the last eight years. Further, on account of the pendency of the case, his further promotion and increments etc are not regularized and the suspension period also was not regularized. Disciplinary proceedings initiated against him also has not been finalised on account of the same. Unless the disposal of the case is expedited, he will be put to serious hardship.
5. The application was opposed by the learned Public Prosecutor on the ground that the Court before whom the case is pending is a Munsiff - Magistrate court and a heavy court.
6. It is an admitted fact that the petitioner was arrayed as accused in O.R. No.257/2005 registered by Deputy Forest Range Officer, Forest Station Marayoor, alleging that the petitioner along with others have trespassed into the Marayoor Forest area and cut and removed some sandal trees from the forest area. It is true that though the crime was registered in the year 2005, the final report was filed only in the year 2013, after Ext.P11 judgment of this Court in O.P.(Crl) 3604/2013 dated 12.10.2013, and now it is pending before Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Devikulam as C.C. 356/2013. It is also seen from the documents produced by the petitioner that earlier he was suspended from service for some time and thereafter he was reinstated, but he was posted outside Idukki District, where the alleged crime was committed by him.
7. The grievance of the petitioner is that on account of the pendency of the case, his suspension period has not been regularized which has affected his promotion as well as eligibility for increment etc. Further, disciplinary proceedings initiated against him were also not finalized due to the pendency of the criminal case.
8. It is true that Articles 20 and 21 of Constitution of India mandates speedy trial of criminal cases where accused were involved, and that has become a fundamental right by now. But, on account of the pendency of large number of cases in each court, the mandate of the Constitution could not be fulfilled in respect of the accused in a case and they had to wait for long time to get their case disposed after trial. In spite of the efforts taken by the judicial officers, they are not able to fulfill this mandate as well. But, that cannot be a ground for denying the right of speedy trial in respect of an accused who comes before this Court and ask for the same. Further, in this case he is a Police Officer in service and on account of the pendency of this case, he was once suspended for some period and later reinstated in service and disciplinary proceedings initiated could not be finalized on account of the pendency of this case. So considering the circumstances, this court feels that some relief has to be given to the petitioner though the case is of the year 2013 as he was facing enquiry, investigation etc from 2005 onwards. So, this court feels that the petition may be disposed of on the basis of the report submitted by the learned Magistrate in this regard, by giving direction to the learned Magistrate to dispose of the case within a time frame. So the petition is disposed of as follows:
Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Devikulam is directed to dispose of C.C. 356/2013 (O.R. 257/2005 filed by Deputy Range Officer, Marayoor Forest Range) pending before that court as expeditiously as possible at any rate within six months from 10.07.2014, on which date the case is now posted for appearance of the other accused persons.
With the above direction and observation, this petition is disposed of.
Officer is directed to communicate this Order to the concerned court immediately.
Sd/- K.RAMAKRISHNAN, JUDGE jjj