Mr. Dhavalshree Surendra Saraiya versus The Union of India

Court: BOMBAY HIGH COURT

Equivalent citations: 2003 (1) AWC 344 SC, (2003) 2 CALLT 23 SC

Bench: S. B. MHASE & A. A. SAYED,JJ.

Mr. Dhavalshree Surendra Saraiya & Others. vs The Union of India & Anr. on November 18, 2008

Mr. Dinesh Tiwari, Adv. For the appellant.
Mr. K. S. Patil for the Intervenor.
Mr. A. S. Gadkari, APP for the State of Maharashtra.
Mrs. Usha Kejariwal for Union of India.

Law Point:
Case to be conducted as the case de die in diem, i.e., day-to-day till the decision of the case. Speedy trial in NRI case.

JUDGEMENT

The petitioners are working       and staying  in Dubai.      They are Indian nationals working in    They are     prosecuted by one Mrs.   Meghna who is   the wife of petitioner        no.1 – Dhavalshree     Surendra    Saraiya.  The prosecution is  for the offences punishable under   section 498-A,     406,  354, 234, 504, 506 read with 34 of IPC.  The charge     sheet has been filed.     The case is pending  before the 13th JMFC Court, Thane.

The petitioners have approached to this    Court for getting        the passports which have been seized   by   the police     authorities     and sent to the Passport  One     thing is clear that once the petitioners   go   out of India,     the   continuation    of the  prosecution  will become difficult. We desire to return the passport, however, only after  completion  of the prosecution at least  before the JMFC.

Therefore, the 13th JMFC Court, Thane is hereby directed that he shall frame charge in the present matter on 20/11/2008 and we direct the petitioners – accused to remain present before the JMFC for framing of the charge. We further direct the JMFC to fix up the matter for hearing and recording of evidence on 8th December 2008 onwards on day-to-day

The State Public Prosecutor is hereby directed to give witnesses list before the JMFC on or before 21/11/2008 and get the summons issued to the said witnesses returnable on 8/12/2008 onwards. The prosecutor who conducts the case and the JMFC before whom the case is to be conducted are directed to conduct the case de die in diem, i.e., day-to-day till the decision of the case, and on no ground the case should be

The investigating Officer who is investigating the case shall remain present in the JMFC’s Court from 8th December 2008 till the completion of the case so that his evidence can be recorded, if necessary, at the closure of the evidence. The judgment in the matter shall be pronounced and delivered by the said JMFC within two days after the closure of the

O. 5th January 2009.

Both petitioner as well as respondent undertake to this Court to withdraw Revision Petitions filed by them before the Sessions Judge at Thane bearing Revision Application Nos. 109/2008, 110 of 2008 and 207 of 2008.

DISCLAIMER: The above judgement is posted for informational purpose ONLY. Printout/ Copy from this website are not admissible citation in the Court of Law. For a court admissible copy contact your advocate.

You may contact me for consultation or advice by visiting Contact Us