NADATHI KUNHIMOHAMMED Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The grievance of the petitioner - the injured, is that his application for transfer was disposed of by the learned Sessions Judge unjustifiably after advancing the transfer petition without giving him an opportunity to advance his contentions.

(2.) The petitioner is the victim in S.C.No.302/01 pending before the I Additional Assistant Sessions Judge, Thrissur. The accused in that case had come to this Court with Crl.M.C.No.3955/06 praying that expeditious disposal of the said case may be directed. Report of the learned Sessions Judge was called for and the learned I Additional Sessions Judge reported that the matter stands posted for trial from 20/1/07 to 24/1/07 and that the matter can be disposed of by 28/2/2007.

(3.) According to the petitioner, this method was resorted to by the accused persons who knew clearly that C.W.1 - the informant - an eye witness, will not be available for trial. It is further submitted that the accused persons were fully aware that there was no Prosecutor to prosecute the cases before the I Additional Assistant Sessions Judge. Taking advantage of these circumstances and in their anxiety to ensure that the case is some how disposed of without proper prosecution, such an application was filed, it is submitted. This Court had only directed that the learned Sessions Judge must attempt to dispose of the matter by 28/2/2006 as undertaken by him.