The criminal appeal by the Assistant Collector was dismissed for non-prosecution due to a prolonged delay and failure to serve notice on the respondent, who had been acquitted earlier.
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.K.MOHANAN
TUESDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2012/20TH BHADRA 1934
CRL.A.No. 1794 of 2006 (F)
CC.86/2002 of ADDL.C.J.M., ERNAKULAM CRLP.429/2006 DATED 18-08-2006
APPELLANT/COMPLAINANT:
THE ASSISTANT COLLECTOR, AIR CUSTOMS, AIRPORT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
BY ADVS.SRI.GEORGE P.VALAVI
SRI.P.C.IYPE, SPL.P.P. FOR P1
SMT.S.HYMA
RESPONDENT/ACCUSED:
V.SIVADASAN NAIR,
P.V.P.MANDIRAM, KURAKANRI, VARKALA P.O.
THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 11-09-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
V.K.MOHANAN, J.
--------------------------------------------Crl.A.No.1794 of 2006
Dated this the 11th day of September, 2012
JUDGMENT
The complainant in a prosecution for the offence under Section 135 (1)(i) of the Customs Act is the appellant as they are aggrieved by the order of acquittal recorded under Section 248 (1) of Cr.P.C. in favour of the accused. From the court record it appears that the above appeal was admitted as early as on 05/10/2006 and thereafter though several opportunities were given to the appellant to serve notice on the respondent, no effective step is seen taken. Though the case was posted on 11/07/2012 and on 25/07/2012 before the Registrar (Judicial), nobody appeared before him and therefore the case posted in the court on 14/08/2012, on which date also there was no representation for the appellant. Consequently the court posted the case on 16/08/2012 for disposal. On 22/08/2012 the case was not taken.
Crl.A.No.1794/2006
: 2 :
However, during this period also no step is seen taken to serve notice on the respondent. Therefore, I am of the view that there is no meaning in granting further time in taking steps against the respondent/accused who got an order of acquittal as early as on 06/03/2006. Therefore, the above appeal is dismissed for non-prosecution.
V.K.MOHANAN, JUDGE
skj
THE ASSISTANT COLLECTOR, AIR CUSTOMS, AIRPORT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
V.SIVADASAN NAIR
P.V.P.MANDIRAM
V. K. MOHANAN
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
