Partly allowed

Vijayan v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC11 Dec 2017Crl.Rev.Pet/1478/2003

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Revision petitions challenging conviction under Section 307 IPC were considered 14 years after admission. Petitions by deceased accused were closed due to unenforceability of sentence. Petitions by surviving appellants were dismissed due to non-prosecution and absence of representation.

What did the court decide?

Death of accused 3 and 4: sensements closed; survivalpetitioners: ndicted d unablest d due to non prosecution.

Vijayan Vs State of Kerala — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Kerala HC (2017)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.UBAID

¶4

MONDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2017/20TH AGRAHAYANA, 1939 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 1478 of 2003 ( ) --------------------------------IN APPEAl 187/2999 of ADDITIONAL SESSIONS COURT (SPL. COURT), KOTTAYAM DATED 02-05-2003

¶5

IN SC 108/1996 of PRL.SUB COURT,KOTTAYAM

¶6

REVISION PETITIONER(S)/APPELLANTS/ACCUSED 2 AND 3:

¶7

1. VIJAYAN, S/O. CHELLAPPAN, KATTIPPARAMBIL VEEDU, RAILWAY PURAMBOKE, MUTTAMBALAM KARA.

¶8

2. CHELLAPPAN, S/O. KESAVAN, VII/419, KOTTAYAM MUNICIPALITY, NETAJI NAGAR, MUTTAMBALAM.

¶9

BY ADV. SRI.MVS.NAMBOOTHIRY

¶10

RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT:

¶11

STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.

¶12

BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT. SREEJA V.

¶13

THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 11-12-2017, ALONG WITH CRRP. 1618/2003, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶14

¶15

P.UBAID, J.

¶16

- - - - Crl.R.P. Nos. 1478 & 1618 of 2003

¶17

- - - - Dated this the 11^th day of December, 2017

¶18

ORDER

¶19

In these revision petitions, the four accused in S.C.No. 108 of 1996 of the Court of Session, Kottayam, challenge the conviction and sentence against them. Crl.R.P.No. 1618 of 2003 is the revision brought by the accused Nos. 1 and 4 and Crl.R.P.No. 1478 of 2003 is the revision brought by the accused Nos. 2 and 3. They were convicted long back, on 28.06.2000, and the appeal was disposed of by the appellate court on 02.05.2003. These two revisions were admitted long back in 2003, but the revisions came up for final hearing after 14 years. When the two revision petitions came up for final hearing, the learned counsel submitted that he has no instruction from the parties. In such a situation, notice was issued to the revision petitioners from the court. The notice was returned with a report that the second revision petitioner in Crl.R.P.No. 1618

¶20

Crl.R.P. Nos. 1478 & 1618 of 2003 -2-

¶21

of 2003 (accused No.4), and the second revision petitioner in Crl.R.P.No. 1478 of 2003 (accused No.3) are no more. The others did not turn up in spite of notice. In view of the death of the accused Nos. 3 and 4, the revision brought in their name will have to be closed when the sentence has become unenforceable due to death. But the revision brought by the others will have to be disposed of. They did not turn up to contest the matter, and there was nobody to represent them when these revision petitions came up for final hearing. The conviction under challenge is under Section 307 IPC, and the sentence is rigorous imprisonment for three years. The prosecution records reveal that the victim had sustained very serious and fatal injuries in the alleged incident. Anyway, it appears that the accused Nos. 1 and 2 are not interested in prosecuting the revisions brought by them.

¶22

In the result, the revision brought by the accused Nos. 3 and 4 will stand closed as the sentence against them has become unenforceable under the law. The revisions

¶23

Crl.R.P. Nos. 1478 & 1618 of 2003

¶24

-3-

¶25

brought by the other accused will zstand dismissed for

non-prosecution.

Sd/- P.UBAID

JUDGE

ds 11.12.2017

//True copy//

P.A. to Judge

Vijayan v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vijayan 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Gangadharan Vs the State of Kerala

Renjith Vs State of Kerala

Scaria Vs State of Kerala

Pandiyamma Vs State of Kerala

Sreenivasan Vs State of Kerala

Anilkumar Vs State of Kerala