The High Court of Kerala, in a criminal revision, dismissed the petition challenging a conviction and sentence under Section 392 I.P.C., finding no error in the concurrent findings of fact and evidence below.
Criminal revision petition dismissed confirming the conviction and sentence passed against the revision petitioner.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT :
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR
THURSDAY, THE 12TH FEBRUARY 2009 / 23RD MAGHA 1930
Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 545 of 2006()
----------------------------CRA.494/2001 of ADDL. SESSIONS COURT (ADHOC)-II, PALAKKAD CC.232/1999 of JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT-I,
PALAKKAD
REVN. PETITIONER(S): APPELLANT/ACCUSED:
KUMARAN, S/O. VELAYUDHAN, AGED 44 YEARS, THENKARAM VEEDU, KANNACHIPARAMBU, KOTTAYI.
BY ADV. SRI.P.VIJAYA BHANU SRI.PRASUN.S
RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT/STATE:
STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.
PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. JAYAKRISHNAN
THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12/02/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
V. RAMKUMAR, J.
ORDER
In this Revision filed under Section 397 read with Sec. 401 Cr.P.C. the petitioner challenges the conviction entered and the sentence passed by the courts below for an offence punishable under Section 392 I.P.C.
This Revision which is devoid of any merit is accordingly dismissed confirming the conviction entered and the sentence passed against the revision petitioner.
Dated this the 12th day of February, 2009.
V. RAMKUMAR, JUDGE
ani/
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court should interfere with the conviction and sentence recorded by the courts below on appeal against a charge punishable under Section 392 I.P.C.
Whether any error, illegality or impropriety exists in the findings of the courts below.
3 provisions across 2 enactments
KUMARAN, S/O. VELAYUDHAN
STATE OF KERALA
V. RAMKUMAR
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
