Bahuleyan, vs State of Kerala,

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided Feb 16, 2022

~3 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1440964

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

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1440964
Court: Kerala High Court
Judge: Honourable Mr. Justice K.Haripal
Decided On: Feb 16, 2022
Case Number: CRL.A/16/2022

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Bahuleyan,

Respondent

State of Kerala,

Excerpt

.....aggrieved by the same, the appellants have moved this court under section 449 of the code of criminal procedure.3. i heard the learned counsel for the appellants and also the learned senior public prosecutor.4. according to the learned counsel for the appellants, crl.a.no.16 of 2022 3the accused could not appear before the court due to covid related restrictions, that he is a youngster, after passing the impugned order, he has surrendered before court and has been released on bail. the learned counsel also requested for showing indulgence and according to him, the amount imposed as penalty is exorbitant.5. the question whether the accused in the case couldbe apprehended on a subsequent point of time cannot be ascertained. in fact, the order was passed after affording them sufficient opportunity to show cause, which was not availed. various mitigating circumstances were also urged by the learned counsel before this court. if the appellants have mitigating circumstances to be placed before the court, one more opportunity can be given and therefore, the order under challenge is quashed and the matter is remanded to the special court for fresh consideration. i am sure that if mitigating circumstances are shown by the appellants, that will be taken into account by the learned special judge. with these observations, the crl.appeal is disposed of.crl.a.no.16 of 2022 4 the appellants are directed to appear before the special court on 17.03.2022. sd/- k.haripal judge dcs/16.02.2022

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.HARIPAL WEDNESDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2022 / 27TH MAGHA, 1943 CRL.A NO. 16 OF 2022 M.C. 2/2021 IN SC 267/2019 OF FAST TRACK SPECIAL COURT, CHANGANASSERY APPELLANTS/COUNTER PETITIONERS/SURETIES: 1 BAHULEYAN, AGED 70 YEARS S/O. SREEDHARAN, CHERUKATTIL HOUSE, CHOTTY KARA, MUNDAKAYAM, 2 ASHA, AGED 45 YEARS D/O. SUGATHAN, THOTTUPURAM HOUSE, PANAKACHIRA KARA, KORUTHODU VILLAGE, BY ADVS.ABDUL RAOOF PALLIPATH K.R.AVINASH (KUNNATH) PRAJIT RATNAKARAN RAJ CAROLIN V. RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT: STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM-682031. BY SMT. SREEJA V., SENIOR PUBLIC PROSECUTOR THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16.02.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Crl.A.No.16 OF 2022 2

JUDGMENT

Appellants are the sureties of the accused in S.C. No.267/2019 pending before the Special Court for the trial of POCSO Act cases, Changanassery. When the accused failed to appear before court, after long absence when his counsel reported 'no instruction', the bond was forfeited and show cause notices were issued to the appellants/sureties as to why the bond amount shall not be realised from them as penalty.

2. In spite of service of show cause notice, they did not

turn up. Thus the court slapped the entire bond amount of Rs. 50,000/- on them as penalty. Aggrieved by the same, the appellants have moved this Court under Section 449 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

3. I heard the learned counsel for the appellants and also the learned Senior Public Prosecutor.

4. According to the learned counsel for the appellants, Crl.A.No.16 OF 2022 3

the accused could not appear before the court due to covid related restrictions, that he is a youngster, after passing the impugned order, he has surrendered before court and has been released on bail. The learned counsel also requested for showing indulgence and according to him, the amount imposed as penalty is exorbitant.

5. The question whether the accused in the case could

be apprehended on a subsequent point of time cannot be ascertained. In fact, the order was passed after affording them sufficient opportunity to show cause, which was not availed. Various mitigating circumstances were also urged by the learned counsel before this Court. If the appellants have mitigating circumstances to be placed before the court, one more opportunity can be given and therefore, the order under challenge is quashed and the matter is remanded to the Special Court for fresh consideration. I am sure that if mitigating circumstances are shown by the appellants, that will be taken into account by the learned Special Judge. With these observations, the Crl.Appeal is disposed of.

Crl.A.No.16 OF 2022 4 The appellants are directed to appear before the Special Court on 17.03.2022. SD/- K.HARIPAL JUDGE DCS/16.02.2022

Same Court & Year Kerala · 2022 Same Parties Bahuleyan, vs State of Kerala, Same Judge Honourable Mr. Justice K.Haripal