Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 59829
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
P.VELMURUGAN, J
Dhanushkison – Appellant
Versus
The Inspector of Police Valparai Police Station – Respondent
Crl.O.P.No.19832 of 2025
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr.N.Sudharsan
For the Respondents:Mr.S.Vinoth Kumar Government Advocate (Crl. Side)
High Courts should refrain from imposing time limits on trial courts unless in exceptional circumstances.
Headnote:This judgment addresses a Criminal Original Petition under Section 528, seeking to expedite a trial. The Supreme Court cautioned against mandating time limits on trial courts except in exceptional cases. Thus, while not enforcing a timeline, the court urged expedited handling of the case. The petition is disposed of accordingly.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. filing of criminal original petition to expedite trial (Para 1) |
| 2. judicial restraint against imposing time limits on trial courts (Para 3 , 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 3. disposition of the criminal original petition with directions to expedite (Para 7) |
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.VELMURUGAN Crl.O.P.No.19832 of 2025 Dhanushkison ... Petitioner Vs.
The Inspector of Police Valparai Police Station Coimbatore District Crime No.177 of 2022 ... Respondent Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 528 of B.N.S.S. , to direct the learned District Munsif Cum Judicial Magistrate, Valparai, Coimbatore District to complete the trial in C.C.No.113 of 2023 within a stipulated time.
For Petitioner : Mr.N.Sudharsan For Respondent : Mr.S.Vinoth Kumar Government Advocate (Crl. Side)
ORDER
This Criminal Original Petition has been filed by the petitioner to direct the learned District Munsif Cum Judicial Magistrate, Valparai, Coimbatore District to complete the trial in C.C.No.113 of 2023 within a stipulated time.
2. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.
3. It is pertinent to state that the Hon'ble Supreme Court has already given a directions to the High Courts not to give directions to the trial Court fixing time limit for disposal of cases in a routine manner and pressurise the trial Court to give priority to a particular case.
4. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case ofSangram Sadashiv Suryavanshi Vs. The State of Maharashtra inCriminal Appeal No.4758 of 2024 dated 25.11.2024 has observed that the High Courts are fixing a time- bound schedule for conclusion of the trials in a routine manner despite the decisions of the Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court in the case of High Court Bar Association, Allahabad vs. State of Uttar Pradesh reported in (2024) 6 SCC 267 , which reads as under:
"47.3. constitutional courts, in the ordinary course, should refrain from fixing a time-bound schedule for the disposal of cases pending before any other courts. Constitutional courts may issue directions for the time-bound disposal of cases only in exceptional circumstances. The issue of prioritising the disposal of cases should be best left to the decision of the courts concerned where the cases are pending."
5. Therefore, this Court is not inclined to fix any time frame to the trial Court to dispose of the case in C.C.No.113 of 2023 as sought for by the petitioner.
6. However, the learned Magistrate is directed to expedite the trial and dispose of the case in C.C.No.113 of 2023 as early as possible as per roster.
7. With the observations and directions, this Criminal Original Petition is disposed of. 16.07.2025 Index : Yes / No Speaking Order : Yes / No Neutral Citation Case : Yes/No ksa-2 To
