Dismissed

A.F.Shajan v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC22 Sept 2014Crl.MC/461/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner, an accused in plea bargaining proceedings, sought time to comply with the disposition terms under Section 482 Cr.P.C. The court noted that compensation is recoverable as fine and installment applications under Section 424 Cr.P.C. are the proper remedy for delays, thus dismissing the petition.

What did the court decide?

Petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. dismissing; CrIl. M.A 8824/2014 closed.

A.F.Shajan Vs State of Kerala — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Kerala HC (2014)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.UBAID

¶4

MONDAY, THE 22ND DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2014/31ST BHADRA, 1936

¶5

Crl.MC.No. 461 of 2013 ()

¶6

CC 725/2008 of JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, CHAVAKKAD

¶7

PETITIONER(S)/ACCUSED :

¶8

A.F.SHAJAN

¶9

S/O. A.V.FRANCIS, ARAKKAL HOUSE, PUVATHUR P.O. THRISSUR.

¶10

BY ADV. SRI.L.RAJESH NARAYAN IYER

¶11

RESPONDENT(S)/COMPLAINANT :

¶12

1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE PAVORATTY POLICE STATION THROUGH THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA ERNAKULAM – 682 031

¶13

2. V.K.CHANDRAN

¶14

S/O. KUNJU, VELLAPARAMBIL HOUSE, TIRUNELLUR P.O. CHAVAKKAD.

¶15

R2 BY ADV. SRI.RAJIT

¶16

R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT. SAREENA GEORGE P.

¶17

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 22-09-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶18

Crl.MC.No. 461 of 2013 ()

¶19

APPENDIX

¶20

PETITIONERS ANNEXURES:

¶21

ANNEXURE 1: COPY OF THE JOINT STATEMENT DATED 30.05.2012 ANNEXURE 2: COPY OF THE POSSESSION NOTICE DATED 14.12.2012

¶22

RESPONDENTS ANNEXURES: NIL

/TRUE COPY/

PA TO JUDGE

sab

P.UBAID, J.

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

¶28

Crl. M.C. No.461 of 2013

¶29

Dated this the 22^nd day of September 2014

¶30

O R D E R

¶31

The petitioner herein is the accused in C.C No.725 of 2008 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Chavakkad. During the proceedings he opted plea bargaining, and made application to the court accordingly. The parties came to terms and filed satisfactory disposition containing the terms of the settlement as meant under Section 265 D of the code of Criminal Procedure. Annexure 1 is said to be the said disposition. The statement of facts submitted by the petitioner here shows that the court later passed judgment under Section 265 E Cr.P.C in terms of the disposition. But the said judgment is not seen produced in court. Anyway the prayer in this petition brought under Section 482 Cr.P.C is to grant some time to comply with the terms of Anneuxre 1 disposition.

¶32

On hearing both sides, I find that a direction as sought by the petitioner cannot be granted by this court. What is sought by him is not time to make payment in terms of judgment but some time to comply with the terms of Annexure 1 disposition. Once the said disposition is accepted by the court and judgment is pronounced, the parties will have to comply with the directions in the judgment. If he is directed to make payment of compensation, and if he could not make payment in time, he will have to approach the trial court for appropriate relief. Compensation

¶33

Crl. M.C. No.461 of 2013 2

¶34

is amount recoverable as fine. In case application is made to make payment of fine in installments, orders can be passed by the trial court. The petitioner could have applied under Section 424 Cr.P.C, if he wanted some time to make payment in installments. But instead of making such an application for the proper and legal relief, he brought this petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. I find that legally a direction as sought by the petitioner cannot be granted by the court. Pending the proceedings the complainant in the case filed Crl. M.A 8824 /14 for a direction to enforce the sentence. Of course, he can very well approach the trail court itself if enforcement of the order is delayed for no reasons. Crl.M.A 8824/2014 is accordingly closed.

¶35

In the result, this Crl. M.C is dismissed.

P.UBAID JUDGE

sab

/TRUE COPY/

PA TO JUDGE

A.F.Shajan v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

A.F.Shajan 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

M.P.Muhammed Vs State of Kerala

Abdul Rahim Vs State of Kerala

Anikumar.N. Vs State of Kerala

A.F.Shajan Vs State of Kerala

Ashfak Naseem Vs Surej

Rasheed Vs Shuhaib T.V.