G.Nirmala v. Public Prosecutor,Ekm.
Case brief
What is this about?
This criminal misc. petition challenged the sessions court's order taking cognizance of an FIR regarding defamation against a Minister. The High Court held that the specific merits, including the validity of the sanction or the complaint's timing, could not be examined in this misc. petition and remanded the matter for trial to the sessions court.
What did the court decide?
The petitions are disposed accordingly; petitioners are entitled to raise contentions and seek discharge at the trial stage before the Sessions Court.
What the court decided
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT :
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR
TUESDAY, THE 19TH OCTOBER 2010 / 27TH ASWINA 1932
Crl.MC.No. 2317 of 2010()
CC.4/2010 OF SESSIONS COURT, ERNAKULAM
PETITIONERS / ACCUSED :
------------------------------------
1. G.NIRMALA, SPECIAL CORRESPONDENT, SAMAKALIKA MALAYALAM VAARIKA, C/O.THE NEW INDIAN EXPRESS, EXPRESS HOUSE, KALOOR, KOCHI-682 017.
2. P.J.ALEX, @ SAJI JAMES,
- SPECIAL CORRESPONDENT, SAMAKALIKA MALAYALAM VAARIKA C/O.THE NEW INDIAN EXPRESS, EXPRESS HOUSE, KALOOR, KOCHI-682 017.
Issues for consideration
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the court can quash the order taking cognizance under section 482 CrPC without analyzing the articles or the validity of the sanction.
Whether petitioners are entitled to seek discharge upon grounds that trial proceedings should proceed before the Sessions Court.
Whether the Sessions Court may dispense with the presence of petitioners for recording evidence under section 244 CrPC in discharge applications.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
G. NIRMALA
- petitioner
P.J.ALEX
- petitioner
S.JAYACHANDRAN NAIR
- petitioner
SUNIL NAMBIAR
- respondent
PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
- respondent
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court