The High Court of Karnataka on Monday rejected the plea for transfer of the rape case against Nithyananda Swami of Nithyananda Dhyana Peeta from Ramanagaram district court and pulled up complainant K. Lenin for “having acted on his own way leading the court instead of the court controlling the case and proceeding with the matter”.
Observing that the trial was pending for he last decade without much progress, the court directed the Ramanagaram district court to expedite the trial by adhering to the guidelines issued by the apex court in the case of Akil alias Javed Vs NCT of Delhi to ensure speedy trial of a case and to rule out the possibility of manoeuvring taking place by granting undue long adjournments on mere asking by the parties in a case.
Justice B.A. Patil passed the order while dismissing Mr. Lenin’s petition for transfer of trial from Ramanagaram court and to continue recording his evidence as a continuation of his earlier recorded evidence in August 2018 and set aside freshly recorded evidence in August 2019.
“... the records indicate that even though he [Lenin] was present before the [trial] court, he did not step into the witness box to give evidence. The said attitude of the complainant is deprecated. If he really wants to do justice, then under such circumstances, he must come forward and give evidence as contemplated under the law,” the court observed.
The trial court as well as the parties appearing in the case have not adhered to the proposition of law laid down by the apex court in Akil’s case so as to make a progress and to ascertain the truth in the case, the High Court said, while holding that the petitioner had not established any cause for transfer of trial from Ramanagaram to Bengaluru.
If the accused persons as well as the witnesses fail to cooperate with the trial, the trial court shall keep in mind the guidelines issued by the apex court and expedite the trial, the High Court said observing that “slow progress of a case is considered to be an evil to society”.
The High Court also said that bailable and non-bailable warrants issued against Mr. Lenin for not appearing before the court for recording evidence with an intention to expedite the trial cannot be considered to be an illegal act that will bias the petitioner.
Pointing out that the evidence of Mr. Lenin recorded in August 2018 had to be left out as it was declared as illegal by the High Court and the apex court as it was recorded with the help of a translator, who himself is a witness named in the charge sheet in the case, and hence the trial court had to re-record his evidence as per law, and process of fresh recording of evidence will not prejudice the complainant, the High Court said.
