In this criminal appeal under Section 378(3) Cr.P.C., the High Court dismissed the appeal against the acquittal of four accused persons charged with offences under Sections 341, 324, 326, and 34 of the IPC.
The criminal appeal was dismissed and the acquittal of the accused was upheld.
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 DR. JUSTICE KAUSER EDAPPAGATH
THURSDAY, THE 2ND DAY OF MARCH 2023 / 11TH PHALGUNA, 1944
CRL.A NO. 416 OF 2007
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CC NO.110/2000 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS -II,NEYYATTINKARA
APPELLANT/COMPLAINANT:
STATE OF KERALA THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY ADV PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
RESPONDENTS/ ACCUSED:
1 ABDUL JABBAR S/O. MUHAMMED ILLYAS, RESIDING AT ALBARAK MANZIL, NPI/880TH NUMBER, NEAR OLD KARAKKAMANDAPAM,, UPANIYOR DESOM, NEMOM VILLAGE. 2 ABDUL REHIM, S/O.MEERAN PILLAI KUZHIVILA VEEDU, NEAR HOMEO COLLEGE, UPANIYOOR DESOM, NEMOM VILLAGE. 3 IQBAL, S/O.SALI KUZHIVILA VEEDU NEAR HOMEO COLLEGE, UPANIYOOR DESOM,, NEMON VILLAGE. 4 SAINULABDEEN, S/O.ABDUL RASAK RESIDING AT VATTAVILA VEEDU, NPI.858TH NUMBER, MANUKOOLADICHAMANGALAM, NEMOM VILLAGE. BY ADVS. SRI.K.RAMAKUMAR SR. SRI.A.SAMEER
SMT.S.REKHA. SR .PP.
THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 02.03.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
Crl.A.No. 416 of 2007
..2..
J U D G M E N T
Dated this the 2nd day of March, 2023
This is an appeal filed u/s 378(3) of the Cr.P.C. against the judgment of acquittal passed by the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Neyyattinkara (for short, 'the Court below') in C.C.No.110/2000 dated 15/03/2006.
Crl.A.No. 416 of 2007
..3..
final report at the court below. The court below took cognizance of the offence.
..4..
Crl.A.No. 416 of 2007
looking the evidence on record. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the accused submitted that the court below has appreciated the evidence in the correct perspective and rightly found that the prosecution has failed to prove the case against the accused beyond reasonable doubt. The counsel further submitted that an order of acquittal can only be interfered in exceptional cases and it is not such a case.
..5..
Crl.A.No. 416 of 2007
DW1 also would show that accused No.2 has sustained injury in the very same occurrence.
..6..
Crl.A.No. 416 of 2007
injuries in a different manner. Hence, the court below extended benefit of doubt to the accused.
I have gone through the entire records, evidence, proceedings and judgment of the court below. I find no perversity or illegality therein warranting interference. The appeal fails, and accordingly, it is dismissed.
Sd/-
DR. KAUSER EDAPPAGATH JUDGE
APA
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court should interfere with the acquittal of the accused persons in the absence of compelling reasons or perversity.
Whether the prosecution evidence, including witness testimony and lack of recovered daggers, was sufficient to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
Whether the judgment of the court below committing benefit of doubt to the accused was perverse or illegal.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
no specific case citedReferred
2 provisions across 2 enactments
STATE OF KERALA
THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
ABDUL JABBAR
ABDUL REHIM
IQBAL
SAINULABDEEN
DR. KAUSER EDAPPAGATH
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
