SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 14259

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
C.PRATHEEP KUMAR, J
ABDUL AZEEZ – Appellant
Versus
RASHIDA – Respondent


Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SRI.P.RAHUL, SMT.ABHINA L., SMT.NAMITHA NEETHU BALACHANDRAN
For the Respondents: SMT.SHIFA LATHEEF, SRI.ARUL MURALIDHARAN, SMT.AKHILASREE BHASKARAN

J U D G M E N T

(Dated this the 24th day of February, 2026)

The respondents 2 and 3 in MC No. 23 of 2024 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate- II, Sasthamcotta filed this OP(Crl) under Article 227 of the Constitution of India praying for a direction to the learned Magistrate to dispose of the case in a time bound manner. When the matter was taken up for arguments, there was no representation for the 2nd respondent/ petitioner in the MC.

2. Considering the nature of the relief claimed in the OP, a report was called for from the learned Magistrate about the time required for the disposal of the MC case. As per the report dated 20.02.2026, the learned Magistrate sought for a period of three months for the disposal of the case.

Therefore, considering the entire facts, this OP(Crl) is disposed of with a direction to the learned Magistrate to dispose of MC No. 23 of 2024 within a period of five months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

Sd/-

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top