Allowed

Nalinan v. State of Kerala and Others

Kerala HC22 Jun 2011Crl.MC/955/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Kerala High Court allowed the petitioner's petition for committal under Sec.407(1)(C) CrPC. The court directed the Judicial Magistrate to commit two connected cases to the Court of Sessions, specifically the Third Additional Sessions Judge at Kollam, to ensure trial of similar allegations of cruelty in the same court by the learned Sessions Judge.

What did the court decide?

Direction to commit C.C.No.151 of 2007 to the Court of Sessions (Third Additional Sessions Judge, Kollam) for trial.

Nalinan Vs State of Kerala and Others — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Kerala HC (2011)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH WEDNESDAY, THE 22ND JUNE 2011 / 1ST ASHADHA 1933

¶4

Crl.MC.No. 955 of 2011() ---------------------------------CC.151/2007 of JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT-I, KOLLAM ....................

¶5

PETITIONER/CW2

¶6

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

¶7

NALINAN, S/O. NEELAKANDAN, AGED 72 YEARS GIREESH BHAVAN, HOUSE NO.60, SV NAGAR, AYATHIL CHERRY, VADAKKEVILA VILLAGE, KOLLAM.

¶8

BY ADV. SRI.V.V.RAJA, SRI.M.T.SURESHKUMAR.

¶9

RESPONDENTS/STATE & ACCUSED

¶10

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

¶11

1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI-31.

¶12

2. ANIL RAJ, S/O. RAJACHANDRAN, AGED 43 YEARS, RESIDING AT RAJ BHAVAN, NEAR GOVT. HOSPITAL, NEDUNGOLAM CHERRY, PARAVUR-691 301.

¶13

3. RAJACHANDRAN, S/O. NEELAKANDAN, AGED 67 YEARS, RESIDING AT RAJ BHAVAN, NEAR GOVT. HOSPITAL, NEDUNGOLAM CHERRY, PARAVUR-691 301.

¶14

4. PUSHPAVALLI, AGED 65 YEARS, D/O. KARTHYAYANI, AT RAJ BHAVAN, NEAR GOVT. HOSPITAL, NEDUNGOLAM CHERRY, PARAVUR-691 301.

¶15

5. BABURAJ, S/O. RAJACHANDRAN, AGED 40 YEARS, AT RAJ BHAVAN, NEAR GOVT. HOSPITAL, NEDUNGOLAM CHERRY, PARAVUR-691 301.

¶16

6. SEEMA RAJ, AGED 34 YEARS, D/O. PUSHPAVALLY, AT RAJ BHAVAN, NEAR GOVT. HOSPITAL, NEDUNGOLAM CHERRY, PARAVUR-691 301.

¶17

R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR.JAYASURYA. R2 BY ADV. SRI.T.K.AJITHKUMAR (VALATH).

¶18

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 22/06/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶19

¶20

Crl.MC.No. 955 of 2011

¶21

APPENDIX

¶22

PETITIONER'S ANNEXURES:

¶23

ANNEXURE 1: COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT DATED 28/03/2003 IN CRIME NO.62 OF 2003 ON THE FILE OF THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE COURT, KOLLAM.

¶24

ANNEXURE 2: COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN CRIME NO.277 OF 2003 OF THE KOLLAM EAST POLICE STATION.

¶25

ANNEXURE 3: COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 01/10/2010 IN CRL.TR. PETITION 2380 OF 2010.

¶26

RESPONDENTS ANNEXURES: NIL.

//TRUE COPY//

P.A. TO JUDGE

THOMAS P JOSEPH, J.

¶31

Crl.M.C.No.955 of 2011

¶32

Dated this 22^nd day of June, 2011

¶33

ORDER

¶34

Notice to respondent No.3 is returned with the endorsement that he expired. Other respondents among respondent Nos.2 to 6 are served of whom the second respondent has appeared through counsel. Learned Public Prosecutor has take notice for the State.

¶35

This petition is filed under Sec.407(1)(C) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short, "the Code”) to issue a direction to the learned Judicial First Class Magistrate-I, Kollam to commit C.C.No.151 of 2007 along with connected records to the Sessions Court, Kollam for trial. C.C.No.151 of 2007 arose from the final report in Crime No.62 of 2003 of the Kollam East Police Station for offence punishable under Secs.498A of the Indian Penal Code (for short, "the IPC”). That case was registered on the complaint preferred by Aswathy (hereinafter referred as the deceased), wife of the second respondent alleging that respondents 2 to 6 subjected her to cruelty demanding more ornaments and money. Police submitted final report in that case on 28.03.2003. On 31.03.2003 the said Aswathy committed suicide. In regard to that

¶36

Crl.M.C.No.955 of 2011

¶37

-: 2 :-

¶38

incident, the Kollam East police registered Crime No.277 of 2003 against respondents 2 to 6 for offences punishable under Secs.306 and 304B r/w Sec.34 of the IPC. Annexure-2 is the final report filed in that case against respondents 2 to 6. That case was committed to the Court of Sessions and it is pending in the Court of learned Third Additional Sessions Judge, Kollam as S.C.No.470 of 2006. While so petitioner filed Crl.Tr.No.2380 of 2010 before learned Sessions Judge requesting to transfer C.C.No.151 of 2007 to the Court of learned Third Additional Sessions Judge. That petition was dismissed by Annexure-3, order dated October 01, 2010 for the reason that respondents 2 to 6 who are affected by the transfer are not made parties to the said petition. In this proceeding, petitioner requests for a direction to the learned Third Additional Sessions Judge to commit C.C.No.151 of 2007 to the Court of Session. I have heard learned counsel for petitioner, second respondent and the learned Public Prosecutor.

¶39

Apart from the power of the Magistrate to direct committal under Sec.323 of the Code in situation of this nature where it is shown that the connected case is pending trial in the Court of Sessions, it is within the power of the High Court to

¶40

Crl.M.C.No.955 of 2011

¶41

-: 3 :-

¶42

issue such direction for committal in view of Sec.4071)(C)(iii) of the Code. By virtue of that power it is open to the High Court to direct that any particular case be committed for trial to the Court of Sessions. This position has been clarified by the Division Bench of this Court in Abdul Salam Vs. Sameera (2007(1) KLT 592) . The Division Bench has said that aggrieved party can apply to the High Court under Sec.407(1)(iii) of the Code to direct the Magistrate to commit a case for trial to the Court of Sessions along with the connected cases.

¶43

Now the question is whether on the facts of the case such an order is required. Charge in both the cases concerned the (alleged) physical/mental cruelty to the deceased. In Crime No.277 of 2003 the allegation is that cruelty has resulted in death of the deceased within seven years of her marriage with the second respondent. Thus, allegation regarding cruelty in both the cases appeared to be the same. In that situation it is appropriate that the same Court tried and disposed of the cases. But, I am not issuing any direction as to whether the cases are clubbed together or, be tried and disposed of simultaneously. That is a matter which the learned Third Additional Sessions Judge has to decide having regard to the facts of the case and

¶44

Crl.M.C.No.955 of 2011

¶45

-: 4 :-

¶46

after hearing the parties as well.

¶47

Resultantly this criminal miscellaneous case is allowed. Learned Judicial First Class Magistrate-I, Kollam is directed to commit C.C.No.151 of 2010 for trial to the Court of Sessions, Kollam who shall make over the case for trial to the Court of learned Third Additional Sessions Judge, Kollam where S.C.No.470 of 2006 is pending. It is open to the parties to request the third Additional Sessions Judge for early disposal of the cases.

¶48

(THOMAS P JOSEPH, JUDGE)

¶49

Sbna/-

Nalinan v. State of Kerala and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nalinan v. State of Kerala and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kurian Kuriakose Vs Rdo

Gopakumar B Nair Vs CBI /Spe

M/S.Shelter Financing and Chits Ltd. Vs State of Kerala

U.Jayagopal Nair Vs State of Kerala

Joseph.M.J Vs State of Kerala

Bhargavan Pillai Vs the State of Kerala