Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)2400/2010 on 17 August, 2010Author:Ashim Kumar RoyBench:Ashim Kumar Roy.2010
                                             CRR No. 2400 of 2010

        In Re:- Mantu Ranjan Mondal & Ors.                                       petitioners

        Mr. Prabir Majumdar                       for the petitioner

        Ms. Rupa Bandyopadhyya                    for the State


               Liberty             to correct the petition.Heard         Mr.    Prabir    Majumdar,          learned              advocate      appearing     on

        behalf      of     the      petitioners       as    well        as        Ms.    Rupa    Bandyopadhyya,

        learned advocate appearing on behalf of the State.InvokingSection 483of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the

        present petitioners who have been facing their trial of a charge

        underSections           468/471/420/120Bof         the       Indian    Penal     Code    in

        connection with G.R. Case No. 249 of 2003 before the Learned Chief

        Judicial Magistrate, Krishnagar, Nadia arising out of Nakashipara

        P.S. Case No. 27 of 2003 dated 16th February, 2003 have approached

        this    court        for     a    direction    for           expeditious             conclusion     of   the

        trial.It     is      submitted       that         on        16th        of    February,       2003,     the

        Nakashipara            P.S.       Case    No.           27          of        2003     underSections

        468/471/420/120Bof the Indian Penal Code was registered against

        the present petitioners and finally the said case was ended in

        charge-sheet           and       charge-sheet       for         the       self       same   offence      was

        submitted on September 11, 2003. Thereafter, charge was framed on

        18th November, 2004 but till date out of nine witnesses only four

        have been fully examined.Now, having regard to the facts that the right to speedy

        trial    is      a    fundamental        right          of     an        accused       guaranteed      under2Article 21of the Constitution and the facts that the aforesaid

case is pending for trial for a pretty long period, I direct the

Learned   Magistrate    to    conclude       the    trial   as    expeditiously    as

possible, preferable within a period of eight months from the next

date   fixed   for   trial.    The   learned        Magistrate     is   directed   to

proceed with the trial strictly in terms ofSection 309of the

Code of Criminal Procedure and on a continuous basis.                   The learned

Magistrate is further directed not to grant any adjournment to

either of the parties unless the court finds the same is necessary

for ends of justice.This criminal revisional application is thus disposed of.

       Criminal   Section     is   directed        to   deliver   urgent   photostat

certified copy of this order to the parties, if applied for, as

early as possible.(Ashim Kumar Roy,J.)