Mary vs State of Kerala

MARY vs State of Kerala

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided Jul 21, 2022

~3 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1444800

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/1444800
Court: Kerala High Court
Judge: Honourable Dr. Justice Kauser Edappagath
Decided On: Jul 21, 2022
Case Number: Crl.MC/590/2020

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

MARY

Respondent

State of Kerala

Excerpt

.....records of cw1. the court below, allowed the said petition as per annexure c order. it is under challenge in this crl. m.c.3. i have heard sri. anil k.muhamed, the learned counsel for the petitioner, sri. v.k.balachandran, the learned counsel for the additional 2nd respondent as well as sri. p.g.manu, the learned senior public prosecutor.4. the wound certificate of cw1 was admitted in to evidence and-3- marked. the wound certificate shows that cw1 was treated as out patient on 24.04.2014. but a reading of fis would show that, in fact, cw1 was admitted as inpatient. it was in these circumstances, the petition has been filed to summon the entire treatment records to prove whether cw1 was actually hospitalized or not.5. section 311 of cr.p.c gives wide power to the magistrate courtto summon any witness or to recall any witness already examined at any stage of the proceedings, provided it is necessary for the just decision of the case. similarly, section 91 of cr.p.c can be invoked at any stage of the proceedings. here, the prosecution wanted to call for the records and also to recall cw1 only to clear the confusion about the hospitalization of cw1. i am of the view that the court below is absolutely justified in allowing the petition. accordingly, crl.m.c is dismissed. sd/- dr. kauser edappagath judge uu 21.07.2022 -4- appendix of crl.mc 590/2020 petitioner annexures annexure a photocopy of cmp no.3435/2019 in cc no.222/2015 of the court of judicial first class magistrate, tripunithura. annexure b photocopy of the objection. annexure c certified copy of order dated 27/12/2019in cmp no.3435/2019 in cc no.222/2015 of the court of judicial first class magistrate, tripunithura.

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE KAUSER EDAPPAGATH THURSDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF JULY 2022 / 30TH ASHADHA, 1944 AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CC 225/2015 OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, TRIPUNITHURA PETITIONER/RESPONDENT NO.2/ACCUSED NO.2: MARY AGED 53 YEARS W/O ANTONY, VADAKKE KURIKAYIL HOUSE, NORTH OF PADIPPURA TODDY SHOP, PATHAM MILE, UDAYAMPEROOR, MANAKKUNNAM VILLAGE, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. ANIL K.MOHAMMED SRI.BENNY M.JOHN SRI.V.S.MANSOOR SMT.BINU K.B. RESPONDENT/PETITIONER/COMPLAINANT: 1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE S.I. OF POLICE, UDAYAMPEROOR REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA PIN - 682031 **2 VIJI R., AGED 35 YEARS, D/O VIJAYAN INDEEVARAM, VALIYAKULAM, UDAYAMPEROOR, THRIPUNITHURA ERNAKULAM DIST. **ADDL.R2 IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER IN CRL.M.A.NO.1/2022 DATED 21.07.2022 IN CRL.M.C.NO.590/2020 V.K.BALACHANDRAN DRISHYA K.PRAKASH SRI P G MANU-SR PP THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21.07.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: -2-

JUDGMENT

This Crl.M.C.has been filed challenging Annexure C order passed by the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Tripunithura in C.M.P.No.3435/2019.

2. The petitioner is the accused. The offences alleged against the

petitioner are under Sections 323, 325, 506(i), 498(A) & 34 of the Indian Penal Code. Entire evidence was closed and the case was posted for hearing. At the juncture, the prosecution filed a petition, C.M.P.No.3435/2019, under Section 311 of Cr.P.C to issue summons to the Superintendent, Taluk Head Quarters Hospital, Tripunithura, to produce entire treatment records of CW1. The court below, allowed the said petition as per Annexure C order. It is under challenge in this Crl. M.C.

3. I have heard Sri. Anil K.Muhamed, the learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri. V.K.Balachandran, the learned counsel for the additional 2nd respondent as well as Sri. P.G.Manu, the learned Senior Public Prosecutor.

4. The wound certificate of CW1 was admitted in to evidence and

-3- marked. The wound certificate shows that CW1 was treated as out patient on 24.04.2014. But a reading of FIS would show that, in fact, CW1 was admitted as inpatient. It was in these circumstances, the petition has been filed to summon the entire treatment records to prove whether CW1 was actually hospitalized or not.

5. Section 311 of Cr.P.C gives wide power to the Magistrate Court

to summon any witness or to recall any witness already examined at any stage of the proceedings, provided it is necessary for the just decision of the case. Similarly, Section 91 of Cr.P.C can be invoked at any stage of the proceedings. Here, the prosecution wanted to call for the records and also to recall CW1 only to clear the confusion about the hospitalization of CW1. I am of the view that the Court below is absolutely justified in allowing the petition. Accordingly, Crl.M.C is dismissed. Sd/- DR. KAUSER EDAPPAGATH JUDGE uu 21.07.2022 -4- APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 590/2020 PETITIONER ANNEXURES ANNEXURE A PHOTOCOPY OF CMP NO.3435/2019 IN CC NO.222/2015 OF THE COURT OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE, TRIPUNITHURA. ANNEXURE B PHOTOCOPY OF THE OBJECTION. ANNEXURE C CERTIFIED COPY OF ORDER DATED 27/12/2019

IN CMP NO.3435/2019 IN CC NO.222/2015 OF THE COURT OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE, TRIPUNITHURA.

Same Court & Year Kerala · 2022 Same Parties MARY vs State of Kerala Same Judge Honourable Dr. Justice Kauser Edappagath