SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
B.R. Gavai, Aravind Kumar, JJ.
Sanjiv Kumar Rajendrabhai Bhatt – Appellant
Versus
The State of Gujarat – Respondent
Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s). 2023 of 2023
Decided On : 20-02-2023
Fact of the Case:
The High Court had initially fixed a time frame for concluding a trial, which was later extended. The petitioner challenged this extension in a special leave petition.Finding of the Court:
The court found the petitioner's approach to be frivolous and without substance, dismissing the petition with costs.Issues:
Extension of time for trial conclusion, Cooperation with Trial Court, Frivolous PetitionRatio Decidendi:
Importance of expeditious disposal of criminal trials, Dismissal of frivolous petitionsFinal Decision:
The petition was dismissed as frivolous with costs quantified at Rs.10,000 to be deposited with the Gujarat State Legal Services Authority.ORDER
1. Vide order dated 04.10.2021, the High Court had initially fixed a time frame of nine months in concluding the trial. Thereafter, again by order dated 10.06.2022, the period was extended by six months. It appears that since the trial could not be completed within the said period, the learned Additional Sessions Judge vide letter dated 16.12.2022 requested for extension of six months for disposing of the case.
2. The learned Single Judge of the High Court vide order dated 06.01.2023 granted extension till 31.03.2023 i.e. almost by a period of three months.
3. Shri Devadatt Kamat, learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, submits that a number of witnesses are not yet examined and direction as is issued would prevent the Trial Court to decide the matter in a judicious manner.
4. Mr. Maninder Singh, learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the State and Mr. A.N.S. Nadkarni, learned senior counsel appearing for the original complainant, submit that the petitioner has suppressed the fact that the order dated 04.10.2021, which had fixed the time schedule of nine months was challenged before this Court and the special leave petition challenging the same i.e. SLP (Crl) No.8615/2021 was dismissed by this Court vide, order dated 05.08.2022.
5. The parties in a criminal trial should be more interested in expeditious disposal of the trial.
6. When the learned Single Judge of the High Court has granted extension and that too on the second occasion, we do not find that there was any cause for the petitioner to have approached this Court by filing a special leave petition.
7. Though, Shri Devadatt Kamat, submits that non-mentioning of the order passed in the Special Leave Petition (Crl) No.8615/2021 is not deliberate but inadvertent, it is difficult to believe that such an important omission was inadvertent and not deliberate.
8. Though, it is submitted on behalf of the respondents that the petitioner has been indulging in delaying tactics and strictures have been passed against him on various occasions, we do not find it necessary to go into that aspect of the matter.
9. The petitioner, rather than approaching this Court, ought to have cooperated with the Trial Court for expeditious disposal of the proceedings. The grant of extension of time is a matter between the Trial Court and the High Court.
10. We find this petition to be totally frivolous and without substance. The same is, accordingly, dismissed with costs quantified at Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only), to be deposited with the Gujarat State Legal Services Authority, within a period of four weeks.
11. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.
The importance of expeditious disposal of criminal trials and criticism of approaching higher courts instead of cooperating with Trial Courts.
Orders for expeditious proceedings should only be passed with cogent and extremely compelling reasons and after examining the matter from all angles. Pending matters should also be considered expedit....
Dismissal of a bail application does not necessitate an early trial conclusion
Judicial restraint must be exercised by High Courts to avoid unjust criticism of subordinate judiciary.
The court emphasized the need for expeditious trial and directed the trial to proceed on a day-to-day basis, while extending the time for completion of the proceedings.
The court emphasizes timely disposal of cases to uphold justice, directing completion of trial within a stipulated timeframe.
The court's discretion under Article 136 and the importance of expeditious trial completion
The right to a speedy trial under Article 21 mandates that trials should not be unduly delayed, balancing procedural fairness with judicial efficiency.
The court's decision emphasized the flexibility provided by the Limitation Act, Section 5, in extending or condoning the period of limitation for filing written statements.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.