IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 27^TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ WRIT PETITION NO. 29865 OF 2025 (GM-RES)

BETWEEN:

1. MR. VINAY M N, S/O LATE NANJUNDEGOWDA M, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, R/A #311, CHANNANAKOPPALU, KIKKERI, K.R.PETE TALUK, MANDYA-571 426.

2. MRS. VANAJAKSHI, W/O LATE NANJUNDEGOWDA M, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, R/A #311, CHANNANAKOPPALLU, KIKKERI K.R. PETE TALUK, MANDYA-571 426.

…PETITIONERS (BY SRI MILASH ARROL NORONHA, ADVOCATE)

AND:

Digitally signed by LAKSHMI T

1. STATE OF KARNATAKA, Location: High Court of BY KIKKERI POLICE STATION, Karnataka REP. BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU, KARNATAKA-560 001.

2. SRI SHIVANNA, S/O LATE BASAVEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 73 YEARS, R/A VASANTHAPURA VILLAGE, HARALAHALLY (POST), SHEELANERE HOBLI, K R PETE TALUK, MANDYA 571426.

…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI RAHUL RAI.K, HCGP FOR R-1)

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO-DIRECT THE LRD. III ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, SRIRANGAPATANA, MANDYA TO DISPOSE OF S.C. NO. 5006/2021 ARISING OUT OF CRIME NO. 0010/2020 REGISTERED BY THE KIKKERI POLICE STATION MANDYA EXPEDITIOUSLY WITHIN A PERIOD OF SIX (6) MONTHS OR WITHIN THE TIME LIMIT THAT MAY BE FIXED BY THIS HONORABLE COURT (ORDER SHEET PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-

D).

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ

ORAL ORDER

The petitioners' only prayer is to direct the trial Court for expeditious disposal of the case and to conclude the trial within the time limit of six months.

2. The petitioners are chargesheeted in connection with Crime No.10/2020 of Kikkeri Police Station, K.R. Pet Circle, Mandya District, and they are facing trial before the Court of learned III Additional District and Sessions Judge, Srirangapatna, Mandya District, in SC No.5006/2021, for the offence punishable under Sections 498A and 304B of IPC and under Sections 3, 4 and 6 of the Dowry Prohibition Act read with Section 34 of IPC.

3. It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioners that charges are framed as far back as on 29.10.2021 and since then only three witnesses are examined and therefore, the inordinate delay in recording the evidence of the remaining witnesses has resulted in undue hardship to the petitioners. It is contented that the right to speedy trial is a Fundamental Right guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India and speedy trial is an integral and essential part of the Right to Life and Liberty.

4. The learned HCGP has contended that the delay is also on account of the absence of accused and even NBWs were issued against them.

5. It is not in dispute that the charges were framed on 29.10.2021 and as on today only three witnesses are examined by the trial Court. The matter is pending before the trial Court for the last four years. The prosecution has to secure the witnesses for the purpose of recording their evidence and cannot unnecessarily take time to secure their presence.

6. In the facts and circumstances, the trial Court is directed to expedite the trial, without granting unnecessary adjournments to the prosecution. The defence is also directed to co-operate for the early disposal of the case.

7. With the above observations, the petition is disposed of.

8. IA No.1 and 2 of 2025 are disposed of.

Sd/-

(MOHAMMAD NAWAZ)

JUDGE tsn*

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 20