Title: Jamal Ranjha v Chandra Kumar Pandey
Decided on: 03.10.2023
+ CRL.M.C. 7127/2023
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE TUSHAR RAO GEDELA
Introduction
The present petition was filed under Article 227 of the Indian Constitution (Power of superintendence over all courts by the High Court) read with Section 482 Cr.P.C., 1973 (Saving of inherent powers of High Court).
It prayed to give directions to the learned Trial Court for completing the trial within two months from the next date of hearing which was 16 October 2023, in FIR No. 60/2009 registered at Zafrabad Police Station under 302 IPC, 1860 for Murder.
Facts of the Case
Petitioner Jamal Ranjha has been facing trial in FIR No. 60/2009 for the past 14 years. All the Evidence of Prosecution was complete, only the evidence of IO was remaining.
Courts Judgement and Analysis
The Hon’ble High Court listened to both parties, The Counsel for Petitioner submitted that the matter has been hanging since the year of 2009, which makes it 14 years to date. He emphasized that it is a grave injustice of Jamal’s Fundamental Rights under Article 21 of the Indian Constitution. Counsel requested the court that the petitioner is only asking for a speedy trial and wants the Hon’ble Court to give direction to the Learned Trial Court to finish the trial within two months from the date of the next hearing i.e. 16 October 2023 when the last evidence of IO was also supposed to be recorded.
However, the learned APP for the State submitted that the petitioner cannot claim that his case has been hanging for the past 14 years as he is a habitual offender and 20 cases in total are still pending against him.
The learned Assistant Public Prosecutor also submitted that Jamal Ranjha was given Bail in 2013 and he had absconded thereafter and he had stopped appearing before the Learned Trial Court since then. The APP also submitted that the petitioner was re-arrested in 2016 for some other offense, the APP emphasized that it was because of the absconding of the petitioner that the matter was on trial for so long, it was not the fault of the Prosecution or the Trial Court.
The Hon’ble court observed that the petitioner may be facing trial for 20 criminal cases and he must be a habitual offender but these facts cannot be a solid reason for jeopardizing his Fundamental Rights under Article 21 of the Indian Constitution. The Court also emphasized that it is true that the petitioner absconded from 2013 to 2016, which was a matter of three years, and because of that reason maybe the trial was delayed for Three years, yet the Petitioner being an offender under the Criminal Law of India is entitled to Rights Under Article 21, and he can demand a speedy trial.
The High Court ordered the learned trial court to conclude the entire trial within six months from the date of the next hearing.
“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”
Written by- Aditi
