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.

K.Arjunan vs Prasanna

K.Arjunan vs Prasanna

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Orders Decided Sep 20, 2023
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1345094

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 Orders High Court
Judge
Decided On
Case Number
Crl.Rev.Pet/202/2006

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

K.Arjunan

Respondent

Prasanna

Excerpt

in the high court of kerala at ernakulampresent the honourable mr. justice p.somarajan wednesday, the 20th day of september 2023 / 29th bhadra, 1945 against the order dated 31.12.2004 in cc 527/2000 of judicial magistrate of first class -ii,neyyattinkararevision petitioner/defacto complainant: k.arjunan, s/o. kumarabose, aged 60 years, muralivilasom, chengal p.o.,, vlathankara,neyyattinkara taluk,thiruvananthapuram by advs. sri.m.k.chandra mohandas sri.sabu s.kallaramoola respondents/accused and state: 1 prasanna, d/o. kanakambika 2 vincent, s/o. joseph, 3 gopinathan nadar, s/o. parameswaran nadar, nalukettu puthen veedu, padippura, karinchoori, machiyode desom, chenkal village.4 the state of kerala represented by the public prosecutor, high court of kerala, ernakulam. r4 by adv. smt ,m n maya, public prosecutor this criminal revision petition having come up for admission on 20.09.2023, the court on the same day delivered the following:orderit is against the order of acquittal the defacto complainant came up in criminal revision in the year 2006. it was so far not admitted. now almost seventeen years elapsed. today also the counsel for the revision petitioner was not ready to argue the matter on admission. since it is against the order of the acquittal, i am of the view that no further time can be granted. nothing was brought to the notice of this court challenging the correctness, legality or propriety of any of the findings or the sentence awarded or any irregularity in the proceedings. hence, the crl. r.p fails, dismissed. sd/- p.somarajan judge spv

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.SOMARAJAN WEDNESDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2023 / 29TH BHADRA, 1945 AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 31.12.2004 IN CC 527/2000 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS -II,NEYYATTINKARA

REVISION PETITIONER/DEFACTO COMPLAINANT: K.ARJUNAN, S/O. KUMARABOSE, AGED 60 YEARS, MURALIVILASOM, CHENGAL P.O.,, VLATHANKARA,NEYYATTINKARA TALUK,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM BY ADVS. SRI.M.K.CHANDRA MOHANDAS SRI.SABU S.KALLARAMOOLA RESPONDENTS/ACCUSED AND STATE: 1 PRASANNA, D/O. KANAKAMBIKA 2 VINCENT, S/O. JOSEPH, 3 GOPINATHAN NADAR, S/O. PARAMESWARAN NADAR, NALUKETTU PUTHEN VEEDU, PADIPPURA, KARINCHOORI, MACHIYODE DESOM, CHENKAL VILLAGE.

4 THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. R4 BY ADV. SMT ,M N MAYA, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20.09.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

ORDER

It is against the order of acquittal the defacto complainant came up in criminal revision in the year 2006. It was so far not admitted. Now almost seventeen years elapsed. Today also the counsel for the revision petitioner was not ready to argue the matter on admission. Since it is against the order of the acquittal, I am of the view that no further time can be granted. Nothing was brought to the notice of this Court challenging the correctness, legality or propriety of any of the findings or the sentence awarded or any irregularity in the proceedings. Hence, the Crl. R.P fails, dismissed. Sd/- P.SOMARAJAN JUDGE SPV

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial