1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 12.01.2011 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.PERIYA KARUPPIAH Crl.O.P.(MD).No.344 of 2011 Gnanam ...Petitioner/Accused No.7 -Vs- State represented by The Inspector of Police Palavoor Police Station Tirunelveli District ...Respondent/complainant Crime No.475/98 PRAYER: Petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, to direct the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge, Tirunelveli, to conclude the trial in S.C.No. 40 of 2009 within a stipulated period more particularly within a period of three months in the interest of Justice. For Petitioner : Mr.K.Jeganathan For Respondent : Mrs. Devasena Government Advocate (Crl. Side) O R D E R This petition has been filed to direct the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge, Tirunelveli, to conclude the trial in S.C.No. 40 of 2009 within a stipulated period more particularly within a period of three months in the interest of Justice. 2. Heard Mr.K.Jeganathan, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mrs. Devasena, learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing on behalf of the respondent. 3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit in his argument that the petitioner was ranked as A-7, in which, the petitioner and other 34 accused were also impleaded for the offences under Sections 147, 148, 457, 324, 326, 307, 302, 436, 427 and 506(ii) read with 149 of IPC. He would further submit in his argument that as per the order of this Court, dated 09.12.2010 in Crl.O.P.(MD).No. 12891 of 2010, the case was transferred from the Fast Track Court No.II, Tirunelveli, to the file of Principal District and Sessions Court, Tirunelveli, with direction to dispose the same as expeditiously as possible. He would also submit that the case is pending from the year 1998 and the petitioner is aged about 73 years and he is unable to attend the Court on every hearing. Therefore, the petitioner has come forward with this Petition seeking for the aforesaid relief. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) would submit in her argument that the case is pending only for the examination of the witnesses and therefore, she would request the Court that three months period may be granted to complete the trial in S.C.No. 40 of 2009. 5. I have given anxious consideration to the arguments advanced on either side. 6. The reason submitted by the petitioner was that he is aged about 73 years and he is unable to attend the Court on every hearing. It is no doubt true that as per the order, dated 09.12.2010 in Crl.O.P.(MD).No. 12891 of 2010, the case was transferred from the Fast Track Court No.II, Tirunelveli, to the file of Principal District and Sessions Court, Tirunelveli,with direction to dispose the same as expeditiously as possible. However, the case is yet to begin with. Therefore, it has become necessary for the Court to order three months time to complete the trial. 7. Accordingly, this Court is inclined to direct the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge, Tirunelveli, to complete the trial in S.C.No. 40 of 2009 within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 8. With the above direction, this Petition is disposed of. vsg Sd/- Assistant Registrar[Writs] /True copy/ To Sub Assistant Registrar 1. The Principal District and Sessions Judge, Tirunelveli. 2.The Inspector of Police, Palavoor Police Station, Tirunelveli District 3.The Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.1 +2 cc to Mr.K.Jeganathan, Advocate SR.No.1667. Crl.O.P.(MD).No.344 of 2011 Dated:12.01.2011 2P/6C RPB 18.01.2011[I.T.] https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/