The High Court of Kerala dismissed a Criminal Miscellaneous Petition seeking quashing of a prosecution due to the petitioner’s consistent non-appearance throughout the hearing process.
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 P.UBAID
MONDAY, THE 01ST DAY OF JULY 2019 / 10TH ASHADHA, 1941
Crl.MC.No.5300 of 2014
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CC 1281/2013 of JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS -II,KOTTARAKKARA
CRIME NO.581/2013 OF Chadayamanagalam Police Station , Kollam
PETITIONER/ACCUSED:
HASSAN KANNU, AGED 60 YEARS S/O.HYDROSE RAUTHER,THEKKEKONATHU VEEDU, KARALIKKONAM VALAVU, CHERIYAVELINALLOOR WARD, VALINALLOOR VILLAGE,KOLLAM-691553.
BY ADV. SRI.G.BHAGAVAT SINGH
RESPONDENTS/STATE & DEFACTO COMPLAINANT:
1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA,ERNAKULAM-682031.
2 ABDUL KABEER, S/O.ABDUL HAMEED RAUTHER, HILAL MANZIL, KARALIKKONAM, ELAMAD VILLAGE, ARKKANNOOR.P.O, KOLLAM-691533.
BY ADVS. SRI.P.CHANDRASEKHAR SMT.P.M.MAZNA MANSOOR SRI.SOORAJ T.ELENJICKAL SRI.T.S.SARATH
OTHER PRESENT:
SRI AJITH MURALI-PP
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01.07.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
Crl.MC.No.5300 of 2014
-2-
O R D E R
The second respondent has entered
appearance through learned counsel. There is no representation for the petitioner. On the last occasion also, there was no representation for the petitioner. The prayer is to quash a prosecution pending before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court (Temp), Kadakkal. The report from the trial court shows that the said case stands made over to the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Kollam. Anyway, it appears that the petitioner is not interested in prosecuting the petition, and that is why, probably, he has been absent consistently.
Hence, the petition is dismissed for non
prosecution.
Sd/-
P.UBAID
Ds 01.07.2019
JUDGE
3 issues framed by the court
Whether a petition to quash a prosecution should be dismissed for non-appearance of the petitioner.
Whether lack of representation by the petitioner justifies dismissal for non-prosecution.
Whether the petitioner’s consistent absence indicates disinterest and warrants dismissal.
HASSAN KANNU
STATE OF KERALA
ABDUL KABEER
P.UBAID
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
