Ankit Maheshwari Alias Chintoo v. State Of Madhya Pradesh
2020-08-14
A.M.KHANWILKAR, DINESH MAHESHWARI, SANJIV KHANNA
body2020
DigiLaw.ai
ORDER : 1. These matter’s are listed before us with office reports mentioning about non-compliance of the directions given for completing the trial within the specified period in terms of orders passed by this Court. 2. We have perused the communications sent by the respective Courts, which incidentally are from the same State of Madhya Pradesh. 3. One common reason mentioned by the concerned court is about the guidelines issued by the High Court for functioning of Court(s) within the State during the pandemic period for taking up only urgent cases. Thus, the trials in the concerned case could not proceed despite the peremptory direction given by this Court. This reason, in our opinion, is unacceptable. For, general guidelines issued by the High Court cannot override the direction(s) given by this Court on the judicial side in the given case, which the concerned Court(s) and all concerned are expected to comply with without any demur in its letter and spirit, unless relaxed by this Court. We say no more. 4. Be that as it may, we direct the concerned Court(s) to ensure that the trial in the respective case(s) is concluded not later than end of December, 2020 and to submit compliance report in the Registry of this Court within the same time. 5. Registry of this Court is directed to forward a copy of this order through e-mail/on-line to the concerned Court(s) for information and necessary action and also to the Registrar General of the High Court to be placed before the Chief Justice of the High Court for issuing appropriate clarification/directions to the subordinate Court(s) to ensure compliance of the order(s) that are being passed by this Court for expeditious disposal of cases. 6. Miscellaneous applications are disposed of in the above terms.