IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT WEDNESDAY, THE 16TH JULY 2008 / 25TH ASHADHA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 2675 of 2008() ------------------------- CC.1/2007 of CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE COURT, TRIVANDRUM .................... PETITIONER: PETITIONER/CW3/DEFACTO COMPLAINANT. ----------------------------------------------- CHARULATHA, AGED 69 YEARS, D/O.SAROJINI AMMA, HOUSE NO.68, ADARSH NAGAR, PATTOM VILLAGE,PATTOM WARD, TRIVANDRUM. BY ADV. SRI.P.VIJAYA BHANU SRI.M.REVIKRISHNAN RESPONDENTS: COMPLAINANT. ------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY P.P. SRI. AMJAD ALI. THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16/07/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT, J. ------------------------------------------------- Crl.M.C. No. 2675 of 2008 ------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 16th day of July, 2008 ORDER The petitioner is the complainant in a prosecution for offences punishable, inter alia, under Secs.420 and 468 of the IPC. Cognizance was taken on the basis of a final report submitted by the police after due investigation. That crime was registered on 4/8/05. That crime was registered on the basis of a private complaint filed by the petitioner before the learned Magistrate and referred by the learned Magistrate to the police under Sec.156(3) Cr.P.C. Final report was filed long later in December, 2006. Cognizance has been taken by the learned Magistrate and the case is pending before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Trivandrum, as C.C.No.1/07. The trial has not commenced yet. The petitioner is a woman aged about 69 years. She suffers from cardiac ailment also, it is Crl.M.C. No. 2675 of 2008 -: 2 :- submitted. According to the petitioner, expeditious disposal is needed. But the learned C.J.M. has not taken any steps in this direction. Even charge has not been framed so far, submits the learned counsel for the petitioner. 2. In these circumstances, it is prayed that there may be a direction for out of turn hearing and disposal of C.C.No.1/07. 3. Has the petitioner moved the learned CJM for this relief? She has not, admittedly. Why has she without and before moving the learned CJM rushed to this Court with this prayer? No satisfactory reasons are shown, except that she being only a de facto complainant, her application may not be considered by the learned Magistrate. 4. I find no merit in that excuse. Though only a de facto complainant, the petitioner can certainly bring to the notice of the learned Magistrate the need for expeditious disposal of C.C.No.1/07. If the petitioner seeks expeditious disposal, the learned Magistrate must consider the same and pass appropriate orders on such application. Without and before doing that, I am of opinion that this petition under Sec.482 Cr.P.C. filed by the petitioner to invoke the extraordinary inherent jurisdiction does not deserve to be entertained. 5. This Crl.M.C. is accordingly dismissed; but with the Crl.M.C. No. 2675 of 2008 -: 3 :- specific observation that the petitioner can move the learned Magistrate for expeditious disposal of C.C.No.1/07 and if moved, the learned Magistrate must consider the same and pass appropriate orders taking into consideration the realities of the situation urged by the petitioner. Sd/- (R. BASANT, JUDGE) Nan/ //true copy// P.S. to Judge