Page No.# 1/5 GAHC010163752025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : W.P.(Crl.)/49/2025 JAYDEEP NANDI S/O LATE JAYANTA NANDI R/O STATION ROAD, SRI BHUMI P.O. AND P.S. KARIMGNAJ DIST. SRIBHUMI, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR REPRESENTED BY THE PP, ASSAM 2:ABHILASHA LAHKAR D/OLATE KAMLESWAR LAHKAR R/O BYE LANE NO. 3 BOC GATE DULIAJAN DIBRUGARH ASSA Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. S P CHOUDHURY, MS B DEVI Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MRIDUL KUMAR KALITA ORDER Page No.# 2/5 28.07.2025 1. Heard Mr. S. K. Choudhury, the learned counsel for the petitioner. 2. This application under Section 227 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioner namely, Jaydeep Nandi praying for expeditious disposal of the PRC Case No. 1728/2021 as well as the application filed by the respondent No.2/informant under Section 311 of the Cr.P.C. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that on 13.09.2024 the respondent No.2 had filed an application in the PRC Case No. 1728/2021 in which the present petitioner is pressing trial as an accused under Section 354(D) of the IPC read with Sections 66(C) and 66(D) of the Information Technology Act. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that though the Trial Court by its order dated 13.09.2024 had allowed the petition filed by the respondent No.2 bearing No.3105/2024 under Section 311 of Cr.P.C., however, the petitioner impugned the said order by filing a criminal petition before this Court. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the criminal petition filed by the present petitioner i.e. Criminal Petition No. 1556/2024 was disposed of on 19.12.2024 by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court by which it had set aside the order dated 13.09.2024 and gave further directions to the trial court to gave an opportunity to the present petitioner to file objection against the petition filed by the respondent No.2/informant and only after hearing both sides the said application shall be disposed of. 4. Leaned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that though this Page No.# 3/5 Court had issued the said direction way back on 19.12.2024, however, Trial Court i.e. the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Dibrugarh instead of complying with the directions of this Court gave further opportunity to the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor to file written objection against the objection filed by the present petitioner. He submits that the objection filed by the present petitioner was against an application under Section 311 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and that too was in pursuant to the directions of this Court. He submits that there is no scope of allowing the State to file objection against the objection filed by the present petitioner. 5. Learned counsel or the petitioner has further submitted that thereafter on several occasions the Trial Court has adjourned the matter by giving opportunity to the private counsel engaged by the informant to assist the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor under Section 338 of BNS. However, till date the said application has not been disposed of and the trial is lingering since last five years. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has approached this Court for invoking its supervisory jurisdiction only under the facts and circumstances of this case where the Trial Court inspite of specific direction by this Court has not disposed of the application filed by the respondent No. 2 under Section 311 Cr.P.C. in pursuant to the directions given by this Court in Criminal Petition No. 1556/2024. 7. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Additional Public Prosecutor. Page No.# 4/5 8. Considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner as well as facts of this case wherein it is apparent that the directions of this Court issued in the Criminal Petition No. 1556/2024 have not been complied with by the Trial Court in letter and spirit, this Court is inclined to dispose of this application in the motion stage itself without issuing notice to the respondent No.2. 9. As it is apparent that the trial court has not followed the directions of this Court in Criminal Petition No. 1556/2024 wherein the only direction issued was to give an opportunity to the present petitioner to file objection, which he has already done, and after hearing both sides the said application was directed to be disposed of. 10. The order sheets annexed along with this application under Article 227 reveals that the PRC Case No. 1728/2021 has being lingered without following the directions which were issued in Criminal Petition No. 1556/2024. 11. In view of above facts and circumstances, by invoking the supervisory jurisdiction of this Court the Trial Court is hereby directed to dispose of the application, filed by the respondent No.2 under Section 311 of Cr.P.C., in pursuant to the order dated 19.12.2024 in Criminal Petition No. 1556/2024 within a period of one month and report compliance thereof to the Registrar (Judicial) of this Court. 12. Further, since the PRC Case No. 1728/2021 is pending for last five years, every endeavor shall be made by the Trial Court to dispose of the said PRC Case as expeditiously as possible. Page No.# 5/5 13. With the above observation, this case stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant