The High Court partly allowed the criminal appeal filed by a surety challenging the imposition of a penalty for the accused's absence. The court reduced the penalty due to the accused's subsequent surrender.
Payment of penalty reduced to Rs. 10,000 to be remitted within three weeks.
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 RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V
MONDAY, THE 24TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2016/2ND KARTHIKA, 1938
CRL.A.No. 959 of 2016 (A)
AGAINST SC 76/2015 of ADDL. D.C. & SESSIONS COURT - III, MANJERI
AGAINST ORDER DATED 2.4.2016 IN MC 131/2015 OF ADDL. SESSIONS JUDGE III, MANJERI. CP 33/2009 of J.M.F.C.,TIRUR CRIME NO. 38/2008 OF TIRUR POLICE STATION , MALAPPURAM
APPELLANT/2ND COUNTER PETITIONER IN MC :
ABDUSALAM
S/O. HAMZA, RESIDING AT KUTTATH PARAVANNA, VETTOM, MALAPPURAM-676 102.
BY ADVS.SRI.NIRMAL V NAIR SRI.RILGIN V.GEORGE
RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT & STATE :
STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM-682 031.
BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. AMJAD ALI.
THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 2410-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
kp
RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V., J.
Crl.A. No. 959 of 2016
Dated this the 24th day of October, 2016
O R D E R
Crl.A. No. 959 of 2016 -2-
the learned Public Prosecutor.
4.The learned counsel submits that the accused had surrendered before the Additional Sessions Judge on 23/05/2016 and he has been released on bail. It is submitted that there was no wilful laches on the part of the appellant and according to the learned counsel, the petitioner was out of station in connection with his employment and it was in the said circumstances that he had failed to secure the presence of the accused on the day fixed for his appearance in court. It is prayed that since the accused has surrendered, it is only just and proper that some remission is granted.
5.I have heard the learned public prosecutor as well.
6.Taking note of the fact that the accused had surrendered before the court below and having regard to the facts and circumstances, I am of the view that the penalty imposed is on the higher side. I am of the view that directing the petitioner to remit a sum of Rs 10,000/- towards penalty
Crl.A. No. 959 of 2016 -3-
will serve the ends of justice .
RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V., JUDGE
SKS
//TRUE COPY//
P.A. TO JUDGE
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the penalty imposed on the appellant for the accused's failure to appear was excessive given the subsequent surrender.
What quantum of penalty remission should be granted in light of the accused's surrender.
2 provisions across 1 enactments
ABDUSALAM
STATE OF KERALA
RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
