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.

Abdul Harees vs Somanadhan

Abdul Harees vs Somanadhan

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided Jun 30, 2022
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1485120

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
Case Number
Crl.Rev.Pet/396/2022

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Abdul Harees

Respondent

Somanadhan

Excerpt

in the high court of kerala at ernakulampresent the honourable mrs. justice mary joseph thursday, the 30th day of june 2022 / 9th ashadha, 1944 crl.rev.pet no. 396 of 2022 against the order/judgment in cra 121/2019 of district court & sessions court,thodupuzha st 326/2018 of chief judicial magistrate, thodupuzha revision petitioner/appellant/accused :- abdul harees aged 51 years s/o. mammus, peringalathuparambil house, panchikavu p.o, changanasserry, presently residing at appartment no. 10(a), jewel bay view flats, janatha road, near manamel temple, vyttila p.o, ernakulam pin - 682019 by advs. s.jathin das sreekanth s.nair respondents/respondents/complainant & state :- 1 somanadhan aged 67 years, s/o. velayudhan kuruvikkattile house, thodupuzha east p.o karikkode village, thodupuzha pin - 6855842 state of kerala represented by public prosecutor, high court of kerala, ernakulam - 682018 by sri.renjith george, pp this criminal revision petition having come up for admission on 30.06.2022, the court on the same day delivered the following: crl..p no. 396 of 2022orderdated this the 30th day of june, 2022 though the case stands posted for admission, the learned counsel for the revision petitioner is not prepared to argue on merits. therefore, the findings of guilt and order of conviction passed by the courts below and the sentence as modified by the appellate court are confirmed. but as of indulgence, this court is inclined to grant two week’s time for depositing the fine amount stands ordered by the trial court and confirmed by the appellate court, before the trial court. trial court shall proceed to execute the sentence imposed only after the two weeks’ time now stands granted. with the above observations, crl.r.p is disposed of. sd/- mary joseph judge sma

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE MARY JOSEPH THURSDAY, THE 30TH DAY OF JUNE 2022 / 9TH ASHADHA, 1944 CRL.REV.PET NO. 396 OF 2022 AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CRA 121/2019 OF DISTRICT COURT & SESSIONS COURT,THODUPUZHA ST 326/2018 OF CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, THODUPUZHA REVISION PETITIONER/APPELLANT/ACCUSED :- ABDUL HAREES AGED 51 YEARS S/O. MAMMUS, PERINGALATHUPARAMBIL HOUSE, PANCHIKAVU P.O, CHANGANASSERRY, PRESENTLY RESIDING AT APPARTMENT NO. 10(A), JEWEL BAY VIEW FLATS, JANATHA ROAD, NEAR MANAMEL TEMPLE, VYTTILA P.O, ERNAKULAM PIN - 682019 BY ADVS. S.JATHIN DAS SREEKANTH S.NAIR RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT & STATE :- 1 SOMANADHAN AGED 67 YEARS, S/O. VELAYUDHAN KURUVIKKATTILE HOUSE, THODUPUZHA EAST P.O KARIKKODE VILLAGE, THODUPUZHA PIN - 685584

2 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM - 682018 BY SRI.RENJITH GEORGE, PP THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 30.06.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Crl..P NO. 396 OF 2022

ORDER

Dated this the 30th day of June, 2022 Though the case stands posted for admission, the learned counsel for the revision petitioner is not prepared to argue on merits. Therefore, the findings of guilt and order of conviction passed by the courts below and the sentence as modified by the appellate court are confirmed. But as of indulgence, this Court is inclined to grant two week’s time for depositing the fine amount stands ordered by the trial court and confirmed by the appellate court, before the trial court. Trial court shall proceed to execute the sentence imposed only after the two weeks’ time now stands granted. With the above observations, Crl.R.P is disposed of. Sd/- MARY JOSEPH JUDGE SMA

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial