Disposed

Adv. Vishnu Sunil Panthalam v. State of Kerala, Represented by Secretary to the Government

Kerala HC20 Mar 2024WP(C)/5823/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

An accused in a caste-atrocity case sought direction that the Forensic Science Laboratory promptly analyse CCTV footage he had supplied to disprove the allegations. The court disposed of the writ petition directing the Director of the FSL to submit the analysis report within one month.

What did the court decide?

Respondent No.2 directed to submit FSL report within one month from receipt of certified copy of judgment.

Adv. Vishnu Sunil Panthalam Vs State of Kerala, Represented… — Caste Atrocities | Kerala HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K. BABU

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF MARCH 2024 / 30TH PHALGUNA,

¶5

¶6

WP(C) NO. 5823 OF 2024

¶7

PETITIONER/S:

¶8

ADV. VISHNU SUNIL PANTHALAM
AGED 35 YEARS
S/O SUNIL PANTHALAM, NARAYANEEYAM,
THIRUMULLAVARAM, KOLLAM, PIN - 691512
BY ADV JOMY K. JOSE

¶9

RESPONDENT/S:

¶10

1 STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT

¶11

DEPARTMENT OF HOME, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695001

¶12

2 THE DIRECTOR FORENSIC SCIENCE LABORATORY, VAZHUTHACAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695003

¶13

3 STATION HOUSE OFFICER KOLLAM WEST POLICE STATION, KOLLAM, PIN - 691013

¶14

OTHER PRESENT:

¶15

G SUDHEER,PP

¶16

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 20.03.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶17

W.P.(C) No.5823 of 2024

¶18

..2..

¶19

K.BABU, J.

¶20

W.P.(C) No.5823 of 2024

¶21

Dated this the 20^th day of March, 2024

¶22

JUDGMENT

¶23

The prayers in the Writ Petition are as follows:-

¶24

(i) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order or direction directing the 2^nd respondent to submit the FSL report in Crime No.908/2023 of Kollam West Police Station, Kollam City within a period of three weeks.

¶25

(ii) Declare that the delay on the part of the 2^nd respondent in submitting the FSL report in Crime No.908 of 2023 of Kollam West Police Station, Kollam City is illegal.

¶26

(iii)Issue such other writ, order or direction as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit in the facts and circumstances of the case.

¶27

The petitioner is arrayed as the sole accused in Crime No.908 of 2023 of Kollam West Police Station. The offences alleged against the petitioner are punishable

¶28

..3..

¶29

W.P.(C) No.5823 of 2024

¶30

under Sections 294(b) and 323 of the IPC and Sections 3(1)(j), 3(1)(s) and 3(2)(va) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.

¶31

The prosecution case is that on 28.08.2023 at 11.30 am, the petitioner showered abusive words on the defacto complainant and voluntarily caused hurt to him. It is further alleged that the petitioner abused the defacto complainant by calling his caste name.

¶32

The petitioner relies on the CC TV footage of the relevant day to show that the allegations are false. It is submitted that the petitioner had submitted the CCTV footage to the investigating agency which forwarded the same for analysis to the Forensic Science Laboratory. The grievance of the petitioner is that the inordinate delay in getting report from the Forensic Science Laboratory causes prejudice to him. The learned Public Prosecutor submitted that respondent No.2 has not submitted any response on the time required for the analysis of the CCTV footage.

¶33

..4..

¶34

W.P.(C) No.5823 of 2024

¶35

It is submitted that the delay in the analysis of the CCTV footage may even affect the credibility of the report of the Forensic Laboratory. The learned counsel for the petitioner relied on the decisions of this Court in B.A.No. 11291 of 2023 (Sanjay Oraon v. State of Kerala) and B.A.No.2722 of 2022 (Aneeshkutty v. State of Kerala) to substantiate his contentions.

¶36

Having regard to the circumstances brought out on record, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing respondent No.2 to submit the report within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a certified copy of

¶37

this judgment.

¶38

Sd/- K.BABU, JUDGE

¶39

kkj

¶40

W.P.(C) No.5823 of 2024

¶41

..5..

¶42

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 5823/2024

¶43

PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1A TRUE COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO.
908/2023 OF KOLLAM WEST POLICE
STATION, KOLLAM CITY DATED 28-08-2023
Exhibit P2A TRUE COPY OF THE FIRST INFORMATION
STATEMENT DATED 28-08-2023
Exhibit P4CCTV FOOTAGE WITH THE VOICE OF THE
ALLEGED INCIDENT
Exhibit P4TRANSCRIPT OF THE CCTV FOOTAGE DATED
28-08-2023 AT 11.30 AM

Adv. Vishnu Sunil Panthalam v. State of Kerala, Represented by Secretary to the Government

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Adv. Vishnu Sunil Panthalam v. State of Kerala, Represented by Secretary to the Government

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

Gopakumar Vs State of Kerala

Babu Vs State of Kerala

Janaki Amma, (Died Lhrs Recorded) Vs Muhammed

Babu Vs State of Kerala

Omana Vs State

Jibin Raj Vs Jomon Mathai