WPCRL/875/2022 of NEENA SHRESTHA Vs STATE OF UTTARAKHAND
Parties
- This Writ Petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India to direct the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nainital to decide the Criminal Case No.2505 of 2015, “State (PETITIONER)
- Amandeep Sandhu”, under Section 304A of IPC, in a time bound manner (RESPONDENT)
Cites (2 resolved of 5 detected)
Statutes cited (4)
- code of criminal procedure, 309 (1973)
- constitution of india, article-227 (1950)
- constitution of india (1950)
- indian penal code (1860)
Full text
solid underline = linked page · dashed underline = case is in our corpus, page not published yet · dotted red = recognized reference, not in our corpus
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHANDAT NAINITAL
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR VERMA
11[TH] MAY, 2022
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 875 of 2022
Between:
Ms. Neena Shrestha
……..Petitioner
and
State of Uttarakhand and Others ..…Respondents
Counsel for the Petitioner : Mr. Prateek Tripathi. Counsel for the State/ Respondent No.1 Brief Holder for the State.
: Mr. Siddharth Bisht, learned
Brief Holder for the State.
Hon’ble Alok Kumar Verma,J.
This Writ Petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India to direct the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nainital to decide the Criminal Case No.2505 of 2015, “State vs. Amandeep Sandhu”, under Section 304A of IPC, in time bound manner.
2.Heard Mr. Prateek Tripathi, the learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Siddharth Bisht, the learned Brief Holder for the State.
3. This is an innocuous prayer.
4. The learned counsel for the State has no
objection.
The speedy and expeditious trial has been
envisaged under Section 309 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The intention of the Legislature was that the proceedings of enquiry or trial should not be adjourned unnecessarily and should be conducted expeditiously. criminal trial has its own gravity and sanctity. The trial court has to be mindful that for the protection of witnesses, and, also in the interest of justice, the mandate of Section 309 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has to be complied with.
6. Therefore, the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nainital is directed to carry out the mandate of Section 309 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, as directed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the State of U.P. Vs. Shambhu Nath Singh and Others, (2001) 4 SCC 667, Mohd. Khalid vs. State of West Bengal, (2002) 7 SCC 334 and Vinod Kumar vs. State of Punjab, (2015) 3 SCC 220.
7. With these directions, the Writ Petition No.875 of 2022 is disposed of, accordingly.
___________________
ALOK KUMAR VERMA, J.