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.

Malli vs State of Kerala

MALLI vs State of Kerala

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided Jun 30, 2022
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1491426

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
OP(Crl.)/280/2022

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

MALLI

Respondent

State of Kerala

Excerpt

.....senior g.p. and addl.public prosecutor sri.renjith george, sr.public prosecutor this op (criminal) having come up for admission on 30.06.2022, the court on the same day delivered the following:judgmentdated this the 30th day of june, 2022. this petition is filed under article 227 of the constitution of india seeking for a direction to special court for sc/st act cases, mannarkkad, palakkad district to keep all proceedings in s.c.no.265/2018 in abeyance till the 1st respondent takes a decision on ext.p3.2. ext.p3 is nothing but an application submitted by themother of the deceased before the 1st respondent seeking for appointment of a new prosecutor in the place of the one already appointed for holding the trial on behalf of the defacto complainant.3. now the learned public prosecutor submitted that agovernment order has been issued substituting the special public prosecutor for holding the trial on behalf of the defacto complainant. in the above circumstances, the matter has become infructuous and o.p(crl.) stands dismissed. sd/- mary joseph judge nab appendix of op(crl.) 280/2022 petitioner’s exhibits: exhibit p1 a true copy of the deposition statement of the pw2 exhibit p2 the true copy of the diary extract ofsc no. 265/2018 on the files of the special court for sc/st act cases , mannarkad, palakadu district exhibit p3 the representation, dated 12/6/2022, submitted by the petitioner to the first respondent respondent’s exhibits: nil //true copy// p a to judge

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 OP(CRL.) NO. 280 OF 2022 IN S.C.NO.265/2018 OF SPECIAL COURT FOR SC/ST (PREVENTION OF ATTROCITIES) ACT CASES, MANNARKKAD PETITIONER/MOTHER OF THE DECEASED: MALLI, AGED 68, W/O.MALLAN, CHINDAKKI, PAZHAYOORU, CHINDAKKI P O, MUKKALI, ATTAPADY, PALAKADU DISTRICT, PIN - 678582 BY ADVS. SRI.P.V.JEEVESH SRI.C.K.RADHAKRISHNAN (CHALIL) RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS: 1 THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, HOME DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695001

2 THE STATE POLICE CHIEF VAZHUTHACAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, KERALA - 695010 BY ADVS. DIRECTOR GENERAL OF PROSECUTION(AG-10) P.NARAYANAN, SENIOR G.P. AND ADDL.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.RENJITH GEORGE, SR.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR THIS OP (CRIMINAL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 30.06.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

JUDGMENT

Dated this the 30th day of June, 2022. This petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India seeking for a direction to Special Court for SC/ST Act Cases, Mannarkkad, Palakkad District to keep all proceedings in S.C.No.265/2018 in abeyance till the 1st respondent takes a decision on Ext.P3.

2. Ext.P3 is nothing but an application submitted by the

mother of the deceased before the 1st respondent seeking for appointment of a new Prosecutor in the place of the one already appointed for holding the trial on behalf of the defacto complainant.

3. Now the learned Public Prosecutor submitted that a

Government Order has been issued substituting the Special Public Prosecutor for holding the trial on behalf of the defacto complainant. In the above circumstances, the matter has become infructuous and O.P(Crl.) stands dismissed. Sd/- MARY JOSEPH JUDGE NAB APPENDIX OF OP(CRL.) 280/2022 PETITIONER’S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE DEPOSITION STATEMENT OF THE PW2 EXHIBIT P2 THE TRUE COPY OF THE DIARY EXTRACT OF

SC NO. 265/2018 ON THE FILES OF THE SPECIAL COURT FOR SC/ST ACT CASES , MANNARKAD, PALAKADU DISTRICT EXHIBIT P3 THE REPRESENTATION, DATED 12/6/2022, SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE FIRST RESPONDENT RESPONDENT’S EXHIBITS: NIL //TRUE COPY// P A TO JUDGE

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial