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.

Radhakrishnan Vs. State of Kerala

Radhakrishnan vs State of Kerala

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided Jul 11, 2014
~5 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1156291

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
Land Acquisition

Case Summary

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

Land Acquisition

Key legal issue
Land Acquisition

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Radhakrishnan

Respondent

State of Kerala

Excerpt

.....his bail application crl.m.c.no.3871 of 2014 :3. : will not be considered on the same day and he will be remanded to custody.5. the petition was opposed by the public prosecutor the ground that the petitioner was absconding.6. it is an admitted fact that the petitioner is accused in l.p.no.22/2014 in c.c.no.1348/2012 on the file of the additional chief judicial magistrate court, ernakulam alleging offence under section 401 of indian penal code. consequent to the non appearance of the petitioner, the learned magistrate issued non bailable warrant to the petitioner. now, non bailable warrant is pending against him. the court below after continuous issuance of warrant against the petitioner, has transferred the above said case to register of long pending cases and it is pending before that court as l.p.no.22/2014. the apprehension of the petitioner that, if he surrenders before the court below and moves for bail, he will be remanded and his application will not be considered on the date of filing itself is not genuine and without any basis. this court has time and again observed in several petitions of this nature that the presiding officers of the criminal courts are duty bound to dispose of the bail applications, if any, crl.m.c.no.3871 of 2014 :4. : filed by the accused persons on their surrender on the date of filing of the application itself unless compelling circumstances warrant postponement of the same to a future date. so, in fact, there is no necessity to issue any direction as sought for in the petition. however, considering the apprehension expressed in the petition, this court feels that the petition can be disposed of as follows: if the petitioner surrenders before the additional chief judicial magistrate court, ernakulam and moves for recalling the warrant and for releasing him on bail in l.p.no.22/2014 now pending before that court, then, the learned magistrate is directed to consider and dispose of the bail application after hearing the assistant.....

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.RAMAKRISHNAN FRIDAY, THE11H DAY OF JULY201420TH ASHADHA, 1936 Crl.MC.No. 3871 of 2014 () --------------------------- LP222014 of ADDL. CJIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATRE COURT, ERNAKULAM --------- PETITIONER/ACCUSED : --------------------------------- RADHAKRISHNAN, AGED32YEARS, S/O. RAMAKRISHNAN, VELLIMPARAMBIL HOUSE, ALANGAD P.O., KOTTAPURAM, THIRUVALLOOR VILLAGE. BY ADV. SRI.K.S.RAJEEV (ALUVA) RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT : ------------------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA,ERNAKULAM-682031 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT.P.MAYA THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON1107-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: BP K. Ramakrishnan, J.

============================== Crl.M.C.No.3871 of 2014 ============================== Dated this, the 11th day of July, 2014. ORDER

This Criminal Miscellaneous Case is filed by the accused in C.C.No.1348/2012 which is numbered as L.P.No.22/2014 on the file of the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Ernakulam to issue direction to the Magistrate under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

2. The case of the petitioner in the petition is that he is the accused in L.P.No.22/2014 in C.C.No.1348/2012 on the file of the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Ernakulam alleging offence under Section 401 of Indian Penal Code. The other accused had already appeared and their case has been disposed of. After investigation, final report was filed and the learned magistrate has taken cognizance of the offence and taken the case on file as C.C.No.1348/12 on the file of the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Ernakulam. The summons issued by the court below did not reach the petitioner as he was working in Kozhikode. Consequent to the non appearance of the petitioner, the learned magistrate issued non bailable warrant to the petitioner. Now, non Crl.M.C.No.3871 of 2014 :

2. : bailable warrant is pending against him. The court below, after continuous issuance of warrant against the petitioner, has transferred the above said case to register of long pending cases and it is now pending as L.P.No.22/2014 before that court. Though the petitioner is prepared to surrender, in view of the pendency of non bailable warrant against him, he apprehends that he is likely to be remanded and his bail application will not be considered on the date of filing of the application itself. So, the petitioner has no other remedy except to approach this Court seeking the following relief: "To direct the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Ernakulam to consider the bail application on the same day itself and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law irrespective of the pendency of the warrant against the accused." 3. Considering the nature of relief claimed in the petition, this Court felt that the petition can be disposed of at the admission stage itself after hearing the counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that his only apprehension is that if he surrenders, his bail application Crl.M.C.No.3871 of 2014 :

3. : will not be considered on the same day and he will be remanded to custody.

5. The petition was opposed by the Public Prosecutor the ground that the petitioner was absconding.

6. It is an admitted fact that the petitioner is accused in L.P.No.22/2014 in C.C.No.1348/2012 on the file of the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Ernakulam alleging offence under Section 401 of Indian Penal Code. Consequent to the non appearance of the petitioner, the learned magistrate issued non bailable warrant to the petitioner. Now, non bailable warrant is pending against him. The court below after continuous issuance of warrant against the petitioner, has transferred the above said case to register of long pending cases and it is pending before that court as L.P.No.22/2014. The apprehension of the petitioner that, if he surrenders before the court below and moves for bail, he will be remanded and his application will not be considered on the date of filing itself is not genuine and without any basis. This Court has time and again observed in several petitions of this nature that the Presiding Officers of the criminal courts are duty bound to dispose of the bail applications, if any, Crl.M.C.No.3871 of 2014 :

4. : filed by the accused persons on their surrender on the date of filing of the application itself unless compelling circumstances warrant postponement of the same to a future date. So, in fact, there is no necessity to issue any direction as sought for in the petition. However, considering the apprehension expressed in the petition, this Court feels that the petition can be disposed of as follows: If the petitioner surrenders before the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Ernakulam and moves for recalling the warrant and for releasing him on bail in L.P.No.22/2014 now pending before that court, then, the learned Magistrate is directed to consider and dispose of the bail application after hearing the Assistant Public Prosecutor of that court in accordance with law as far as possible on the date of filing of the application itself. With the above direction and observation, the petition is disposed of. Office is directed to communicate this order to the concerned court immediately. Sd/- K.Ramakrishnan, Judge. Bb [True copy] P.A to Judge

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial