Allowed

Simi Mathew v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC9 Nov 2010Crl.MC/3969/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court allowed a criminal miscellaneous petition filed by an accused seeking a direction to expedite the disposal of her case, noting it has been pending since 2004. The court directed the Magistrate to dispose the case urgently, with an order to split the case against the petitioner if the second accused remains absconding.

What did the court decide?

Direction to dispose C.C.81/2010 expeditiously; order to split case if second accused is absent.

Simi Mathew Vs State of Kerala — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Kerala HC (2010)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 9TH NOVEMBER 2010 / 18TH KARTHIKA 1932

¶5

Crl.MC.No. 3969 of 2010(A)

¶6

-------------------------------------[CC.NO.392/2007 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT-III, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM]

¶7

PETITIONER/ACCUSED:

¶8

----------------------------------

¶9

SIMI MATHEW, D/O.LELAMMA, KAROOT PUTHEN PURAKKAL HOUSE, MALLAPPALLY THALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT.

¶10

BY ADV. SRI.N.MANU THAMPI.

¶11

RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT:

¶12

---------------------------------------------

¶13

STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.

¶14

BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. P.A. SALIM.

¶15

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09/11/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

prv.

¶17

M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J.

¶18

===========================

¶19

CRL.M.C.No. 3969 OF 2010

¶20

===========================

¶21

Dated this the 9^th day of November,2010

¶22

ORDER

¶23

Petitioner the accused in C.C.392/2007 on

¶24

the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-III, Thiruvananthapuram filed this petition under section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, for a direction to the Magistrate to dispose the case expeditiously contending that the case has been pending since 2007 and

¶25

the offence was allegedly committed in 2004 and petitioner has been co -operating but second accused was absconding and in such

¶26

circumstances, a direction is to be issued to dispose the case expeditiously.

¶27

A report was called for from Judicial

¶28

First Class Magistrate Court-III,

¶29

Thiruvananthapuram as to whether there was any impediment for disposing the case. Judicial

¶30

Crl.M.C.3969/2010 2

¶31

First Class Magistrate sent a report, disclosing that as per order dated 17.6.2010 by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Thiruvananthapuram the case was transferred to Judicial First Class Magistrate Court V, Thiruvananthapuram (Special Court for Mark list cases). The learned Public Prosecutor

¶32

submitted that case is now pending before that court as C.C.81/2010.

¶33

Petition is allowed. As the case is

¶34

pending from 2007 Judicial First Class Magistrate is directed to dispose C.C.81/2010 expeditiously. If the presence of the second accused cannot be procured, learned Magistrate to split up the case as against the petitioner and dispose the same expeditiously.

¶35

M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE

¶36

tpl/-

¶37

M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, J.

¶38

W.P.(C).NO. /06

¶39

--------------------JUDGMENT

¶40

SEPTEMBER,2006

Simi Mathew v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Simi Mathew v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Gadhadharan P. Vs Express Publications(Madurai)Ltd. & Ors.

Manoj v. and 5 Others Vs State of Kerala & Another

Mujeeb and Another Vs State of Kerala and Another

Nikesh Vs S.I. of Police

K.Muhammed Vs State of Kerala

P.Rasheed Vs the Station House Officer