Partly allowed

State of Kerala v. Chandran @ Manichan

Kerala HC14 Oct 2020CRL.A/562/2008

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala dismissed an appellant's appeal uphelding conviction and sentence under IPC 115, deeming it infructuous after four years of concurrent imprisonment. Separately, it partially allowed the State's application to set aside an unmerited set-off granted under Section 428 Cr.P.C. regarding a prior life sentence.

What did the court decide?

Set-off granted under Section 428 Cr.P.C. set aside; other prayers dismissed; conviction and sentence upheld.

State of Kerala Vs Chandran @ Manichan — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Kerala HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.SOMARAJAN

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 14TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2020 / 22ND ASWINA, 1942

¶5

CRL.A.No.52 OF 2008

¶6

AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN SC 516/2006 OF I ADDITIONAL DISTRICT COURT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

¶7

APPELLANT/ACCUSED:

¶8

CHANDRAN @ MANICHAN S/O SIVADASAN,CONVICT NO.6665, CENTRAL PRISON,, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, FROM PATTARUMADOM VEEDU,, CHIRAYINKEEZH, KOONATHOOR DESOM, KEEZHVILLOM, VILLAGE, CHIRAYINKEEZH TALUK.

¶9

BY ADV. SRI.S.RAJEEV

¶10

RESPONDENT/STATE:

¶11

STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, (CRIME NO.164/CR/S1/03, CBCID, SIG-I).

¶12

R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR PP.SRI.RAMESH CHAND

¶13

THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 14.10.2020, ALONG WITH CRL.A.562/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶14

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶15

PRESENT

¶16

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.SOMARAJAN

¶17

WEDNESDAY, THE 14TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2020 / 22ND ASWINA, 1942

¶18

CRL.A.No.562 OF 2008

¶19

AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN SC 516/2006 DATED 14-12-2007 OF I ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

¶20

APPELLANT/COMPLAINANT:

¶21

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

¶22

BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER

¶23

RESPONDENT/ACCUSED:

¶24

CHANDRAN @ MANICHAN S/O SIVADASAN,CONVICT NO.6665 CENTRAL PRISON,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, FROM PATTARUMADOM VEEDU, CHIRAYINKEEZHU, KUNDALOOR DESOM, KIZHUVILLAM VILLAGE,, CHIRAYINKEEZHU TALUK.

¶25

R1 BY ADV. S.S.RAJEEV R1 BY ADV. SRI.S.RAJEEV

¶26

THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 14.10.2020, ALONG WITH CRL.A.52/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶27

CRL.A.No.52 of 2008 & Conn. Case

¶28

¶29

JUDGMENT

¶30

[ CRL.A.52/2008, CRL.A.562/2008]

¶31

CRL.A.52/2008

¶32

Crl.A.No.52/2008 by the sole accused who was convicted under Section 115 Part-I of IPC, and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of four years. At that time he was undergoing imprisonment for life in connection with another offence. As per Section 427 (2) of Cr.P.C. when a life convict subsequently convicted for another offence the sentence has to be run concurrently. Now four years already lapsed, and as such it is fairly submitted by the appellant that the appeal has become infructuous. Regarding the conviction it is fairly submitted that the accused was convicted based on a letter written by a co-prisoner and that there is no valid reason to interfere with the conviction. Hence the Crl. Appl. is dismissed upholding conviction and sentence.

¶33

CRL.A.562/2008

¶34

CRL.A.562 of 2008 is by the State Government challenging the set off given under Section 428 Cr.P.C,. There cannot be any set off as against a sentence undergone by the

¶35

CRL.A.No.52 of 2008 & Conn. Case

¶36

¶37

accused in connection with another case. Hence set off granted cannot be sustained. In the instant case, it has no much relevance as the accused had undergone the sentence awarded for the said offence. The set off granted hence will stand set aside. The prayer for enhancing the sentence has no much relevance since the prisoner is a life convict. Further, the four years imprisonment awarded would reflect a proper balance between the aggravating and mitigating circumstances. Hence deserves no interference.

¶38

Crl.Appeal No.562/2008 will stand allowed in part accordingly.

¶39

Sd/P.SOMARAJAN JUDGE

¶40

VPK

State of Kerala v. Chandran @ Manichan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State of Kerala v. Chandran @ Manichan

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

Suseelan G Vs Jaison Panikulangara

Prajeesh.K.Thomas Vs State of Kerala

Swami Vivikananda Vs State of Kerala

Chandran @ Manichan Vs State of Kerala

Dinesh Mangalassery Vs State of Kerala

Shahul Hameed Vs the State of Kerala