NINAN THAYYIL AND ORS. Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioners in C.M.P. No. 656/2014 in C.C. No. 534/2010 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Alappuzha are the revision petitioners herein.

(2.) The petitioners were arrayed as accused in C.C. No. 534/2010 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Alappuzha alleging offences under Sections 120(B), 420 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code.

(3.) The case was originated on the basis of a private complaint filed by the de facto complainant which was forwarded to the police for investigation under Section 156(3) of Code of Criminal Procedure and crime was registered and after investigation, final report was filed and it was taken on file as C.C. No. 534/2010 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Alappuzha. Though the revision petitioners appeared and after hearing both sides, charge was framed and case was posted for evidence, due to non-availability of the witnesses, the trial of the case could not be completed. The petitioners are permanently residing in Delhi and they are finding it difficult to come to Alappuzha and conduct the case. Further, being an accused, they are having right to have speedy disposal of the cases under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. Further, there are other cases also pending against them as C.C. Nos. 535/2010, 536/2010 and 537/2010 before the same court based on the same transaction but, complaint filed by different complainants. Since the court was simply adjourning the case, they filed C.M.P. No. 656/2014 under Section 258 of Code of Criminal Procedure for dropping the proceedings. But, that petition was dismissed by the learned magistrate by the impugned order which is being challenged by the petitioners by filing this revision.