Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Nowshad Vs. State of Kerala

Nowshad vs State of Kerala

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided Jan 28, 2014
~4 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1123316

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Kerala High Court
Judge
Decided On
Subject
Education

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Education

Key legal issue
Education

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Nowshad

Respondent

State of Kerala

Excerpt

.....annexure a1- true copy of the fir in no.90/2011 of manjeswaram police station. annexure a2- true copy of the final report in annexure a1 crime, filed in c.p.no.148/2012 of jfcm court, kasaragod. annexure a3- true copy of the statement of the defacto-complainant recorded by the2d respondent which forms part of annexure a2 final report. annexure a4- true copy of the order dated0412.2013 in crl.m.c. 5801/2013 of high court of kerala. respondent(s)' exhibits --------------------------------------- nil //true copy// p.a.to judge jjj n.k. balakrishnan, j.------------------------------------------ crl.m.c. no. 947 of 2014 ------------------------------------------ dated this the 28th day of january, 2014 order the petitioner is the 2nd accused in crime no.90/2011 of manjeswar police station. after investigation, charge sheet was filed against the petitioner and other accused persons. the offences alleged are under sections 366(a) and 376 r/w 34 of ipc.2. a petition was earlier filed as crl.m.c. 5801/2013 to quash the proceedings. that petition was dismissed by this court. but the petitioner was given liberty to move the trial court for discharge.3. it appears that the petitioner has not, so far, appeared before the learned magistrate, though annexure a4 order was passed on 4.12.2013. it is quite clear that the crl.m.c. no. 947/2014 -2- petitioner has been trying to evade the process of the court and files petition after petition before this court without surrendering before court. this petition is now filed stating that the learned magistrate should be directed to dispose of his application for bail on the very same day, as if the learned magistrate is not passing orders in such serious matters. the offences alleged against the accused include very serious offences punishable under sections 366(a) and 376 of ipc. there is absolutely no merit in this petition. it is also strange that the accused was not arrested in connection with this serious offence. it is because.....

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.K.BALAKRISHNAN TUESDAY,THE28H DAY OF JANUARY20148TH MAGHA, 1935 Crl.MC.No. 947 of 2014 () -------------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER

IN Crl.MC58012013 of HIGH COURT OF KERALA DATED0412-2013 AGAINST THE ORDER

IN CP1482012 of JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, KASARAGOD CRIME NO. 90/2011 OF MANJESWAR POLICE STATION , KASARGOD PETITIONER(S)/ACCUSED NO.2: ---------------------------------------------------- NOWSHAD AGED32YEARS S/O.MOHAMMED ISMAIL, AALINTHADIYIL RESIDING AT IKWAN'S CLUB BUILDING, ADUKKATH BAYAL KASARAGOD DISTRICT. BY ADVS.SRI.K.J.MOHAMMED ANZAR SRI.A.D.SURESH BABU SRI.K.ABDUL NASSAR COMPLAINANT(S)/RESPONDENTS/STATE & COMPLAINANT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA REP. BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA ERNAKULAM. PIN-682 031.

2. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE POLICE CIRCLE OFFICE, KUMBALA KASARAGOD DISTRICT.PIN-671 321. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. DHANESH MATHEW MANJOORAN THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON2801-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Crl.MC.No. 947 of 2014 () -------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS ------------------------------------- ANNEXURE A1- TRUE COPY OF THE FIR IN NO.90/2011 OF MANJESWARAM POLICE STATION. ANNEXURE A2- TRUE COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN ANNEXURE A1 CRIME, FILED IN C.P.NO.148/2012 OF JFCM COURT, KASARAGOD. ANNEXURE A3- TRUE COPY OF THE STATEMENT OF THE DEFACTO-COMPLAINANT RECORDED BY THE2D RESPONDENT WHICH FORMS PART OF ANNEXURE A2 FINAL REPORT. ANNEXURE A4- TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER

DATED0412.2013 IN CRL.M.C. 5801/2013 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA. RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS --------------------------------------- NIL //TRUE COPY// P.A.TO JUDGE JJJ N.K. BALAKRISHNAN, J.

------------------------------------------ Crl.M.C. No. 947 of 2014 ------------------------------------------ Dated this the 28th day of January, 2014 ORDER

The petitioner is the 2nd accused in Crime No.90/2011 of Manjeswar Police Station. After investigation, charge sheet was filed against the petitioner and other accused persons. The offences alleged are under sections 366(A) and 376 r/w 34 of IPC.

2. A petition was earlier filed as Crl.M.C. 5801/2013 to quash the proceedings. That petition was dismissed by this court. But the petitioner was given liberty to move the trial court for discharge.

3. It appears that the petitioner has not, so far, appeared before the learned Magistrate, though Annexure A4 order was passed on 4.12.2013. It is quite clear that the Crl.M.C. No. 947/2014 -2- petitioner has been trying to evade the process of the court and files petition after petition before this court without surrendering before Court. This petition is now filed stating that the learned Magistrate should be directed to dispose of his application for bail on the very same day, as if the learned Magistrate is not passing orders in such serious matters. The offences alleged against the accused include very serious offences punishable under sections 366(A) and 376 of IPC. There is absolutely no merit in this petition. It is also strange that the accused was not arrested in connection with this serious offence. It is because the accused is so powerful that the police did not arrest him. It speaks volumes. The learned Magistrate knows as to how the bail application is to be disposed of especially in a case of this nature.

4. In the result this Criminal M.C. is disposed of as follows: Crl.M.C. No. 947/2014 -3- If the petitioner files an application for bail, the learned Magistrate will pass appropriate order taking note of the fact that the offences alleged against the petitioner and others are under sections 366(A) and 376 r/w 34 of IPC, which are triable exclusively by the court of Sessions. Sd/- N.K. BALAKRISHNAN, JUDGE //True Copy// P.A. to Judge jjj

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial