- 1 - IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.453 OF 2006 P.R.Gokul and Oths. ..Petitioners Vs. State of Maharashtra & Anr. ..Respondents ... Mr.Vaibhav Patankar with S.T.Markande Advocate for Petitioners Mr.V.B.Konde-Deshmukh A.P.P. for State ... CORAM: D.G.DESHPANDE AND CORAM: D.G.DESHPANDE AND CORAM: D.G.DESHPANDE AND SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,JJ. SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,JJ. SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,JJ. DATE : MARCH 13, 2006 DATE : MARCH 13, 2006 DATE : MARCH 13, 2006 P.C.: P.C.: P.C.: 1. Counsel for the Petitioner wants to delete the Respondent No.2. Permission granted. Respondent No.2 is deleted. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.P.P. for the State. The grievance of the petitioners is that case under Section 498-A of IPC pending against them before the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, 27th Court, Mulund, Mumbai, is not proceeding further even though - 2 - charge in the said case, is framed one year back. He says that Petitioners Nos.1 and 2 are required to come from Trichur, Kerala and also witnesses. The learned A.P.P. states that necessary directions can be given to the learned Magistrate for early disposal of the matter. 3. Looking to the facts of the case, we direct the learned Magistrate to decide and dispose of the said case within two months from the date of the order and preferably take the matter on day-to-day basis looking to the fact that witnesses are coming from Trichur. 4. Petition is disposed of. [D.G.DESHPANDE, J.] [SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J.]