BHAGEERATHIAMMA v. STATE OF KERALA
Case at a glance
- Bench
- P S P S GOPINATHAN
Outcome
Allowed
In the above circumstance, this original petition is allowed in part
Provisions considered
- Constitution of India art. 227
Judgment
BY ADVS.SRI.VINOD J.DEV SRI.PRAMOD J.DEV RESPONDENTS: --------------
STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HOME STATE SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.
THE DISTRICT POLICE CHIEF ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT-688001.
THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT-688001.
SUBHASH.M.S. @ MANIKKUTTAN MANALITHARAYIL, MANNAR.P.O. ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT-689622. THIS OP (CRIMINAL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09-03-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: O.P. (CRL) 489/2012 PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: APPENDIX EXT.P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE POST MORTEM REPORT DATED
18.5.2011. EXT.P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE FIR INITIALLY LODGED BY MANNAR POLICE STATION AS CRIME NO. 248/2011. EXT.P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 5.9.2011 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE SECRETARY TO THE STATE. EXT.P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 27.1.2012 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT. EXT.P5 A TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 27.1.2012 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL. // TRUE COPY // Knc/- P.S. TO JUDGE. P.S. GOPINATHAN, J. = = = = = = = = = = = O.P. (CRL.) NO. 489 OF 2012 = = = = = = = = = = = = = DATED THIS, THE 9th MARCH, 2012. J U D G M E N T In this original petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, petitioner, who is the defacto complainant in S.C. 847 of 2011 on the file of the First Additional Sessions Court, Mavelikkara, seeks the following reliefs: (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) Issue an order or direction directing the respondents 1 -3 to take immediate action for the appointment of a Special Prosecutor for conducting S.C. No. 847/2011 pending before the First Additional District and Sessions Court, Mavelikkara in which the fourth respondent is the accused; Issue a direction or order directing that S.C. No. 847/2011 pending before the Hon'ble First Additional District and Sessions Court, Mavelikkara may be tried and disposed of at the earliest, at any rate within a time frame to be stipulated by this Hon'ble Court; Issue a direction or order directing the first respondent to take immediate action on Exhibit P3 representation submitted by the petitioner seeking appointment of a Special Prosecutor for conducting the case against the fourth respondent herein; such other orders as is prayed for pendente lite by the petitioner and as is deemed fit, just and proper by this Hon'ble Court on the facts and in the circumstances of the case.” O.P. (CRL.) 489/2012 2
2. When the original petition came up for hearing, the learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner would be satisfied with a direction for time bound disposal of the above case as sought for in Relief No.(ii). The submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is recorded.
3. On query through Registry, the Additional Sessions Judge, by letter dated 5.3.2012 reported that the case stood posted to 5.3.2012 for framing charge and he could dispose the case by the end of December,
Operative part
2012. In the above circumstance, this original petition is allowed in part and there would be a writ of mandamus directing the Additional District and Sessions Judge, Mavelikkara to dispose of S.C. 847/2011 on it's file on or before 31.12.2012. knc/- P.S. GOPINATHAN, (JUDGE)
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: In the above circumstance, this original petition is allowed in part
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Constitution of India — art. 227.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.