The High Court dismissed a Criminal Miscellaneous Case challenging a Sessions Court order that refused admission of witness schedules based on media reports, holding the challenge devoid of merits.
This Criminal Miscellaneous Case is dismissed.
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 B.KEMAL PASHA
MONDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF MARCH 2016/1ST CHAITHRA, 1938
Crl.MC.No. 1457 of 2016 ()
SC 408/2009 OF DISTRICT & SESSIONS COURT, ALAPPUZHA.
CP 36/2008 OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT-I, ALAPPUZHA. CRIME NO. 658/2008 OF ALAPPUZHA NORTH POLICE STATION, ALAPPUZHA.
PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.1:
SHIJI JOSEPH @ SHIJIYAPPAN @ CHETTAPPAN S/O JOSEPH, THUMBEL THADICKAL VEEDU, EASTERN SIDE OF INFANT JUNCTION, KALATHU WARD, ALAPPUZHA.
BY ADVS. SRI.C.S.MANU SRI.S.K.PREMRAJ
RESPONDENT(S)/STATE & THE INVESTIGATING OFFICER:
1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM-682031.
2. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
BY SENIOR PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.C.RASHEED
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21-03-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
mbr/
Crl.MC.No. 1457 of 2016 ()
APPENDIX
PETITIONER(S)' ANNEXURES:
ANNEXURE AI: TRUE COPY OF THE LIST OF WITNESSES FILED BY THE PETITIONER IN SESSIONS CASE ON 5.1.2016.
ANNEXURE A2: TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 6.2.2016 IN SC NO.408 OF 2009 PASSED BY THE SESSIONS COURT, ALAPPUZHA.
RESPONDENT(S)' ANNEXURES:
NIL
//TRUE COPY//
P.S. TO JUDGE
mbr/
B. KEMAL PASHA, J.
Crl.M.C. No.1457 of 2016
Dated this the 21st day of March, 2016
O R D E R
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Senior Public Prosecutor.
attempt of the petitioner was to press into service certain media reports and to get it proved through various reporters of the media and news papers. Citing the decision of this Court in Crl.M.C.No.8095/2015, the court below has refused the said witness schedule.
Crl.M.C.1457/2016
: 2 :
3. On hearing either side and perusing Annexure-A2
order as well as Annexure-A1 witness schedule, this Court is
of the view that there is absolutely nothing to interfere with the said order. This Crl.M.C. is devoid of merits and is only
to be dismissed, and I do so.
In the result, this Crl.M.C. is dismissed.
Sd/-
(B.KEMAL PASHA, JUDGE)
aks/21/03
// True Copy //
PA to Judge
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the Sessions Court erred in refusing to admit witness schedules based on media reports.
Whether the High Court should interfere with the refusal order passed in SC No.408/2009.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Crl.M.C.No.8095/2015Explained¶37
SHIJI JOSEPH @ SHIJIYAPPAN @ CHETTAPPAN S/O JOSEPH
STATE OF KERALA
B.KEMAL PASHA
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
