The Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, provides the classification of offences under the IPC and by which the offences are triable in the Court: High Court of Meghalaya

Serial No. 04 Regular List WP(C) No. 2921 Shri Sushan Das HIGH COURT OF MEGHALAYA AT SHILLONG Date of Decision: 25.10.2021 State of Meghalaya Hon’ble Mr. Justice H. S. Thangkhiew Judge : Mr. K. Paul Sr. Adv. with Ms. R. Dutta Adv. : Mr. H. Kharmih Addl. Sr. GA with Mr. H. Abraham GA For the Petitioner(s) For the Respondent(s) i) Whether approved for reporting in Law journals etc.: ii) Whether approved for publication in press: JUDGMENT AND ORDERBy the instant application the petitioner has approached this Court seeking a writ in the nature of mandamus for a direction to issue to the Court of Judicial Magistrate First Class Sohra to pass appropriate orders committing the case registered as GR Case No. 8of 2020 under Section 148 326 506 307 302 34 IPC read with Section 3 of the PDPP Act 1984 to the Court of competent jurisdiction. Further the petitioner prayed for speedy trial of the said case as the charge sheet has been filed as far back as on 26.05.2020 and there has been no progress in the trial. WP(C) No. 2921 Heard Mr. K. Paul learned Senior counsel assisted by Ms. R. Dutta learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. H. Kharmih learned Addl. Sr. GA for the State respondents. Mr. K. Paul submits that pursuant to an FIR filed on 29.02.2020 a case bearing Shella P.S. Case No. 9(2) 2020 under Sections 148 326 506 307 302 34 IPC read with Section 3 of the Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act 1984 was registered and the petitioner was arrested in connection with the said case put in judicial custody for a substantial period of time and thereafter was released on bail. Learned Senior counsel submits that on completion of the investigation the charge sheet was then filed before the Court of Judicial Magistrate First Class Sohra on 26.05.2020 but however even after the charge sheet was filed showing offences triable by a Court of Sessions the committal order has not been passed. This he submits has resulted in the pendency of the case before the Court the Judicial Magistrate Sohra and the same has not progressed which has also resulted in the infringement of the petitioner’s rights for a speedy trial and also Article 21 of the Constitution of India. Mr. H. Kharmih learned Addl. Sr. GA for the State respondents has not advanced any submission but only submitted that the Court of Judicial Magistrate should act in accordance with law. Having heard learned counsels for the parties it is proposed to dispose of this matter at the motion stage itself as the point in issue is very limited and purely involves a question of law. The Criminal Procedure Code 1973 has provided for classification of offences under the Indian Penal Code and the Court WP(C) No. 2921 by which such offences are triable. As per the charge sheet two of the alleged offences namely 307 and 302 are triable by the Court of Sessions and the same being exclusively triable by the Sessions Court therefore as per the provision of Section of 209 Cr.P.C. the case should have been committed to the Court of Sessions especially after the said charge sheet had been filed. The same appears to have not been done by the Court of Judicial Magistrate even though the charge sheet has been filed since 26.05.2020 and over a year has elapsed since notwithstanding the limited functioning of Courts due to the Corona Pandemic. Without further dwelling on any other aspect such as the right to speedy trial which has been time and again reiterated and emphasized by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in a series of judgments and accepted to be an intrinsic aspect of the scope of Article 21 of the Constitution of India this writ petition is allowed and disposed of with the directions to the learned Court of the Judicial Magistrate Sohra to pass appropriate orders in GR Case No. 8of 2020 in accordance with Section 209 Cr. P.C. as expeditiously as possible. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. “V. Lyndem PS” WP(C) No. 2921 

Summary: The point in the issue was very limited and purely involved a question of law. Such an opinion was held by The Hon’ble High Court of Meghalaya before The Hon’ble Mr. Justice H. S. Thangkhiew in the matter of Shri Sushan Das Vs. State of Meghalaya [WP(C) No. 292 of 2021].  The facts of the case were associated with a mandamus writ petition sought by the petitioner for a direction to issue to the Court of Judicial Magistrate First Class, to pass proper orders under Section 148/326/506/307/302/34 IPC of the PDPP Act, 1984 to the Court of competent jurisdiction. A quick trial was prayed by the petitioner. The counsel representing the petitioner stated that the said case FIR was the petitioner was arrested for the said case and was taken into judicial custody for a considerable time and was released after bail. The Senior Counsel stated that even after the filing of the charge sheet the committal order was not passed.  Further, the Senior Counsel submitted that the case was pending before the Court of the Judicial Magistrate which eventually caused infringement of the petitioner’s rights for a speedy trial. The counsel for the State submitted that the Court of Judicial Magistrate should act in accordance with the law.  The Hon’ble Court after considering all the facts and submission held that “… Without further dwelling on any other aspect such as the right to speedy trial which has been time and again reiterated and emphasized by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in a series of judgments and accepted to be an intrinsic aspect of the scope of Article 21 of the Constitution of India, this writ petition is allowed and disposed of with the directions to the learned Court of the Judicial Magistrate, Sohra to pass appropriate orders in GR Case No. 8 (6) of 2020 in accordance with Section 209 Cr. P.C. as expeditiously as possible. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of.”