Disposed

Abdul Salam v. National Investigation Agency

Kerala HC10 Jan 2018Crl.MC/167/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala disposed of a criminal miscellany petition filed by an accused seeking to stay the trial of a UAP Act case. The court held that while the provisions apply to the trial, the passing of final judgment shall be deferred until the Full Bench decides the maintainability issue in a pending appeal.

What did the court decide?

Deferred the passing of final judgment in S.C.No.04 of 2015 pending the decision in Crl.A.No.460 of 2017 allowing the trial to proceed.

Abdul Salam Vs National Investigation Agency — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Kerala HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.M.SHAFFIQUE

¶4

& THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.SOMARAJAN

¶5

WEDNESDAY, THE 10TH DAY OF JANUARY 2018 / 20TH POUSHA, 1939

¶6

Crl.MC.No. 167 of 2018

¶7

AGAINST SC 4/2015 of SPECIAL COURT FOR TRIAL OF NIA CASES,ERNAKULAM

¶8

PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO. 3

¶9

ABDUL SALAM AGED 33 YEARS, S/O. HAMSA, THEKKETHIL HOUSE, NEELENCHERY, KARUVARAKUNDU, WANDOOR, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.

¶10

BY ADVS.SRI.VIPIN NARAYAN SRI.C.JAYAKIRAN

¶11

RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT & ACCUSED NOS. 1,2,4:

¶12

1. NATIONAL INVESTIGATION AGENCY KOCHI, REPRESENTED BY ITS SPECIAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM - 682 031.

¶13

2. ABID CHULLIKULAVAN, AGED 39 YEARS, S/O. HASSAN CHULLIKULAVAN, CHULLIKULAVAN (H), KALIKAVU, NEELANCHERY P.O., MALAPPURAM DISTRICT - 676 525.

¶14

3. MOHAMMED HANEEFA, AGED 49 YEARS, S/O. ABDUL RAHMAN, PUTHUVEETIL (H), PERINJANAMKARA, KODUNGALLUR (P.O.), THRISSUR DISTRICT - 680 664.

¶15

4. ANTONY DAS @ DAS, AGED 64 YEARS, S/O. ANTONY, HOUSE NO. 1249, ANNA NAGAR,

¶16

NADUMALAI ROAD, VALPARAI, COIMBATORE DISTRICT, TAMIL NADU - 642 106.

¶17

R3 BY ADV. SRI.ALIAS M.CHERIAN R4 BY ADV. SRI.SALISH ARAVINDAKSHAN R4 BY ADV. SRI.N.JAGATH R1 BY SRI.M.AJAY, SPL. P.P FOR NIA

¶18

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10-01-2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶19

Crl.MC.No. 167 of 2018 ()

¶20

APPENDIX

¶21

PETITIONER'S ANNEXURES

¶22

ANNEXURE A TRUE COPY OF THE CHARGE SHEET IN RC 01/2014/NIA/KOC. ANNEXURE B TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF REFERENCE IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 460/2017 DATED 23.06.2017 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT. RESPONDENTS' ANNEXURES: NIL

TRUE COPY

P.A. TO JUDGE.

A.M.SHAFFIQUE & P.SOMARAJAN, JJ

¶27

- - - - Crl.M.C. No. 167 of 2018

¶28

- - - - Dated this the 10^th day of January, 2018

ORDER

SHAFFIQUE, J.

This petition has been filed by the third accused in S.C.No.04 of 2015, inter alia contending that the trial court is proceeding with the trial of the case. The question as to whether the allegation of the offence against the accused is maintainable under Section 16 and 18 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 (the 'UAP Act' for short) has been taken up by the accused in Crl.A.No.460 of 2017. In the said criminal appeal a question was raised regarding the application of UAP Act. After considering the matter, this Court by order dated 23.6.2017 referred the matter for consideration before the Full Bench in view of the decision of this Court in Shareef v. State (2013 (4) KLT 60).

¶33

The learned counsel submits that though the question had been referred to the Full Bench, so far it is not listed for hearing. In the mean time, the trial court had listed the case for trial, which is to commence from 11.01.2018.

¶34

This petition is filed inter alia seeking to defer the trial till the disposal of Crl.A.No.460 of 2017. It is contended that if the trial proceeds further, it will prejudice the accused. Learned counsel

¶35

Crl.M.C. No.167 of 2018 -2-

¶36

appearing for the other accused namely, accused Nos. 1, 2 and 4 also supports the case taken up by the petitioner herein.

¶37

On the other hand, learned Special Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the first respondent, NIA submits that no prejudice will be caused to the accused if the trial proceeds. The attempt of the accused is only to stall the proceedings. Being a technical offence, it is for the prosecution to prove certain facts and the question whether the UAP Act applies or not is to be decided by the Full Bench. It is submitted that appropriate orders can be passed to defer the passing of final judgment in the aforesaid criminal appeal.

¶38

Having regard to the aforesaid fact situation, since the matter is already placed before the Full Bench, it is appropriate that the Full Bench consider the matter in accordance with the procedure prescribed. Further, if the trial is stayed as sought for by the petitioner, it will render substantial injustice and cause miscarriage of justice. However, since the accused had already taken up a contention and the matter is pending before this Court in Crl.A.No.460 of 2017 regarding the application of the UAP Act, we are of the view that it is only necessary to observe that the final judgment shall be deferred until a final decision is taken in Crl.A.No.460 of 2017.

¶39

Crl.M.C. No.167 of 2018

¶40

-3-

¶41

In the result, this Crl.M.C is disposed of as under:

¶42

That the passing of final judgment alone, in S.C.No.04 of 2015 on the file of the Special Court for the NIA cases, Ernakulam, shall be deferred until a final decision is taken in Crl.A.No.460 of 2017. It is made clear that the court is entitled to proceed with the trial of the case.

¶43

Sd/- A.M.SHAFFIQUE, JUDGE

¶44

sd/- P.SOMARAJAN, JUDGE

¶45

Abdul Salam v. National Investigation Agency

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Abdul Salam v. National Investigation Agency

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Subran @ Piri Subran, C.NO.1906 Vs State

Ratheeshkumar @Babu Vs State of Kerala

Abdurahiman, C.NO.1963 Vs State of Kerala

Manikandon @ Mani, C.NO.7805, Central Prison, Trivandrum Vs State of Kerala

Jose, C.NO.7111 Vs State of Kerala

K. Geetha Vs State of Kerala