This is a criminal appeal against an order in a criminal court. Due to prolonged pendency and the appellant's failure to make sincere efforts to serve notice on the respondent despite multiple opportunities, the court dismissed the appeal for non-prosecution.
The criminal appeal was dismissed for non-prosecution.
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
THURSDAY, THE 27TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2012/5TH ASWINA 1934
CRL.A.No. 822 of 2005 ( )
AGAINST THE ORDER IN CC.313/2003 of C.J.M.,TRIVANDRUM
APPELLANT(S)/COMPLAINANT:
D.GOPAKUMAR S/O. D.DAMODARAN, AGED 50 YEARS, RESIDING AT 38, ALPINE HEIGHTS DPI JUNCTION, JAGATHY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
BY ADV. SRI.NAIR AJAY KRISHNAN
RESPONDENT(S)/ACCUSED AND STATE:
1. EDWIN C.P. S/O. PERREIRA,
2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY
BY ADV.SMT.S.HYMA, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 27-09-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
ami/
V.K.MOHANAN, J.
Crl.A.No.822 of 2005
Dated this the 27th day of September, 2012.
Though the above appeal was admitted and issued notice on 3.6.2005, no timely step was taken to serve notice and thus the matter was pending before this Court for the last 7 years. Though the matter was posted before the Registrar (Judicial) on 27.7.2011, there was no representation and thus when the case posted before the bench on 3.8.2011, the counsel sought one week time to cure the defect and that time was granted and ordered to post the matter after 10 days if step is not taken. Accordingly, notice was sent on 11.8.2011 through the police officer concerned but the same was returned unserved. Again the matter was posted before the bench on 30.7.2012. On that date also, on the basis of the request of the counsel, ten days' time was granted to cure the
2
Crl.A.No.822 of 2005
defect and directed the petitioner to take step to serve notice on the respondent through speed post by furnishing correct address of the respondent. It appears that notice again sent on 1.8.2012 but the same was also returned. It is also discernible from the order sheet that, notice sent on 3.9.2012 in the name of Mr.Edwin Periera, T.C.32/2713, but that notice was also returned stating that there is no such T.C. in Vallakadavu. Subsequently, on 5.9.2012 also, the Registrar (Judicial) has granted time to furnish the correct address. But the notice was again sent in the same address, which returned stating that there is no such T.C. in Vallakadavu. From the above approach of the petitioner and the endorsement contained in the records it appears that, there is no sincere and earnest effort from the part of the appellant in completing the service of notice on the respondent, inspite of the fact that several opportunities were given. Therefore, I find no bonafides and sincerity in the submission made by the counsel for the appellant.
3
Crl.A.No.822 of 2005
Accordingly, the above appeal is dismissed for non prosecution.
Sd/-
V.K.MOHANAN, Judge
ami/
//True copy//
P.A. to Judge
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the criminal appeal deserves to be allowed in the absence of prosecution despite multiple opportunities to serve notice.
Whether the appellant made a sincere and earnest effort to serve notice on the respondent.
D.Gopakumar
Edwin C.P.
State of Kerala
V.K. Mohanan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
