News: Front Page | National | Southern States | Other States | International | Opinion | Business | Sport | Miscellaneous |
Advts: Classifieds | Employment | Obituary |

DHARWAD, DEC. 4. Cases pertaining to alleged misappropriation of funds ranging from Rs 70 to Rs.700 were left without being resolved, and those accused were forced to struggle for more than one-and-a-half decades to get the case to the Karnataka High Court before they were exonerated.

This is the story of the quest for justice by 106 people from 16 villages in Kalghatgi taluk in Dharwad District who were involved in 16 cases following a complaint by the Assistant Registrar of Co-operative Societies.

Some cases had their origin in 1984, others in 1987. Among those arraigned were the secretaries of the village service cooperatives and retired personnel of the Karnataka Co-operative Central Bank coming from B. Shigigatti, Tavargeri, Dyavanakonda, Beeravalli, Muthigi, Dhummawad, Belavantar, B.Gudihal, Bommigatti, Begur, Mukkal, Bagadageri, G Basavanakoppa, Sangameshwara, Kadanakoppa, and Kuruvinakoppa villagers.

During the long pendency of the issue, seven of the "accused" passed away. So also 92 of the 380 cited as witnesses.

The hearings came up before 16 magistrates, and nine prosecutors, with as many as 16 advocates appearing for the accused. Only Mr. Venkatesh Kulkarni, a legal aid activist from Dharwad was involved from the beginning. He never missed attending court even when he was injured in an accident and could hardly move.

There were 114 adjournments collectively, which worked out to a staggering figure of 1,824 if the individual cases were taken into consideration.

The saga began in 1984 when an FIR from one of the villages came up, and it was three years before the case was filed in a Dharwad court, which then had jurisdiction over Kalghatgi. Chargesheets were framed after 44 adjournments were sought.

The cases were transferred to Kalghatgi where a court was established in 1992, and new numbers were given to the pending cases, all of which were given numbers pertaining the year 1992.

Harried by the delay in the trial courts, some of the accused approached the Karnataka High Court seeking an expeditious trial. At one time, some of them told the trial court "to convict or acquit us", according to Mr. Kulkarni. Some of the elderly accused made it clear that they were unwilling to go to their graves with the odium of being accused.

In an order passed on June 25, 2000, Mr. Justice S.R.Venkatesha Murthy, noted that the grievance of the petitioners was that the trial court had not taken prompt action after the chargesheets were filed as a result of which the petitioners were forced to attend the court for nearly eight years after the chargesheets were filed.

Mr. Murthy directed the court concerned to frame charges within 15 days of the filing of the affidavit, and instructed that priority should be given to the disposal of the cases. He said the cases should be disposed of within six months from the date the charges were framed, and the trial court should start recording evidence of the witnesses thereafter. In any event, the trial should commence within 20 days from the date of framing of charges, and the cases should be tried on a day-to-day basis till the entire evidence was recorded.

In respect of cases where charges had been framed and the petitioners had contended that the prosecution had not taken steps to conduct the trial, the judge directed that the trial should commence within one month; the recording of evidence be completed at the earliest; and cases should be disposed of within six months.

Mr. Murthy directed that the copy of the order should be sent to the trial court, the Director of Prosecutions, and the Director-General of Police to secure their compliance. The petitioners were at liberty to move the court, in the event of failure of any of these agencies to comply with his directions.

But as it transpired, the Gordian knot (of litigation) could not be cut, which compelled the accused to approach the Karnataka High Court for the second time on May 8, 2001. The petitioners told the High Court that the directions given by it had not been complied with.

On June 22, 2001, Mr. Justice Patri Basavangoud, Judge of the Karnataka High Court, noted that although a year had passed since the High Court had passed orders, the cases had not been disposed of.

Mr. Basavangoud sought an explanation from the magistrate concerned, and directed that the trial should commence on a day-to-day basis and be disposed of within two months from the date of the order of the court.

Subsequently, things moved rapidly. The magistrate had been transferred and a new one, Mr. J N Subramanyam, started complying with the directives from the day he took charge.

If only 49 witnesses were examined in a period of 27-and-a- half months earlier, 229 witnesses were examined within five months and five days. With the High Court giving one more extension of time, judgment was given in 11 cases between June 15, 2001 and November 8, 2001. The remaining five cases were disposed of by the end of November.

In the last week of November, the advocate (for the remaining five cases told the magistrate, "You may convict or acquit the accused, but the accused are grateful to you and the prosecution for expediting the trial."

In none of the cases, the charges of misappropriation could be made to stand.

Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Southern States