Disposed

H.M.Shihabudheen v. the Central Bureau of Investigation

Kerala HC22 Feb 2022Crl.MC/1225/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala disposed of a criminal miscellaneous petition where the 2nd accused challenged the prolonged trial since 1998 without a framed charge. The Court noted the petitioner had been absent until 2021 and dismissed the grievance regarding delays, refusing to interfere with the lower court despite sympathy for his poverty-stricken status.

What the court decided

AI extract

H.M.Shihabudheen Vs the Central Bureau of… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Kerala HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL THOMAS

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 22^ND DAY OF FEBRUARY 2022 / 3RD PHALGUNA, 1943

¶5

CRL.MC NO. 1225 OF 2022

¶6

(TO QUASH C.C. NO.25/2021 ON THE FILES OF THE CHIEF JUDICIAL

¶7

MAGISTRATE COURT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM IN RC2/A/91 OF THE SPECIAL POLICE ESTABLISHMENT, COCHIN)

¶8

PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.2:

¶9

H.M.SHIHABUDHEEN AGED 68 YEARS S/O.MYKEENKUNJU NOW RESIDING AT FLAT NO. 5, PONNAMMA AMMA BHAVAN, KOCHUPILAMOODU, KOLLAM, PIN – 691001

¶10

BY ADV C.P.RAVIKUMAR

¶11

RESPONDENT/DEFACTO COMPLAINANT:

¶12

THE CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION CBI ROAD, KATHRIKADAVU, KALOOR, KOCHI, PIN – 682017 REPRESENTED BY ITS INSPECTOR.

¶13

BY ADV.

¶14

SRI.SUVIN R. MENON, CENTRAL GOVERNMENT COUNSEL

¶15

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON

¶16

22.02.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶17

Crl.M.C. No.1225 of 2022

¶18

¶19

ORDER

¶20

Dated this the 22^nd day of February, 2022

¶21

The petitioner who is the 2^nd accused in C.C. No.25/2021 on the files of the Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Thiruvananthapuram in RC2/A/91 of the Special Police Establishment, Cochin, has approached this Court lamenting that though the subject matter occurred in the year 1998 and crime was registered therein, the trial is being dragged on for the last so many years. The petitioner contended that even now, charge has not been framed and proceeding with the case from 1998 onwards without reading the charge is unknown to law. Even in the grounds, it had been repeatedly referred that the approach and proceedings initiated by the trial court from the year 1998 till 2022 without reading over the charge is against the provisions of law and unknown to legal proceedings.

¶22

Though the court below is alleged to have

¶23

¶24

Crl.M.C. No.1225 of 2022

¶25

been prolonging the matter, perusal of the facts show to be otherwise. The crime was registered as R.C. No.2/2021 and final report was filed in 1991. Cognizance was taken as C.C. No.14/96. The accused remained absent through out the proceedings. After trial the 1^st accused was convicted. It emerges that the case was split up as C.C. No.25/2021 and refiled. The petitioner filed B.A. No.3429/2004 before this Court seeking anticipatory bail. It was submitted by the learned Public Prosecutor that the petitioner was absconding. Consequently, bail application was dismissed.

¶26

At this length of time, after remaining elusive from the judicial proceedings for so many years and making appearance in 2021 and now attributing latches on the court for delaying the proceedings till 2022, cannot be appreciated at all.

¶27

Though the learned Counsel for the petitioner vehemently justified it and also sought an early disposal of the matter in the light of Annexure-4

¶28

Crl.M.C. No.1225 of 2022

¶29

¶30

medical certificate, contending that the petitioner is unable to move, I am not impressed much by the conduct of the petitioner. However, I do not stand in the way of the court below, having regard to pendency of older cases, also considering the fact that the petitioner is a senior citizen, the matter being taken up, if the court so feels, if an appropriate application for early disposal is filed before the court below.

¶31

With these observations, Crl.M.C. is disposed of.

Sd/-

SUNIL THOMAS

JUDGE

SKP/22.02

Crl.M.C. No.1225 of 2022

¶37

¶38

APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 1225/2022

¶39

PETITIONER'S ANNEXURES:

¶40

ANNEXURE 1 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER ISSUED BY THE SENIOR MANAGER DATED 9/8/2004 ANNEXURE 2 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE CHARGE SHEET ANNEXURE 3 TRUE COPY OF THE SUMMONS ANNEXURE 4 TRUE COPY OF THE MEDICAL CERTIFICATE

¶41

RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL

¶42

TRUE COPY

¶43

P.A.TO JUDGE

H.M.Shihabudheen v. the Central Bureau of Investigation

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

H.M.Shihabudheen v. the Central Bureau of Investigation

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Suhara Vs v.a.Sahadevan

Sunilkumar Vs State of Kerala

Sumeet Goyal Vs State of Kerala

Josemon Vs State of Kerala

Suresh K Vs T.K.Jose IAS

C.a.Muhammed Vs the State of Kerala