Sheeba K., vs State of Kerala,

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided Mar 17, 2020

~4 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1747424

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/1747424
Court: Kerala High Court
Judge: Honourable Mr. Justice Ashok Menon
Decided On: Mar 17, 2020
Case Number: CRL.A/333/2020

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Sheeba K.,

Respondent

State of Kerala,

Excerpt

.....the legal heirship certificate to prove that she is the only legal heir of the deceased, who is entitled to get possession of the material objects. the learned sessions judge vide the impugned order dated 19.02.2018 in crl.m.p.no.99/2018 has observed thus “in para 389 of the judgment it is specifically stated all the material objects shall be preserved even after the termination of appeal if any, as two accused are awaiting trial and six are absconding”. in view of the said observation in the original judgment, the learned sessions judge found that the ornaments cannot be released to the petitioner (appellant herein).2. heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellant and the learned senior public prosecutor. it is pertinent to note that the material objects pointed out as above are all personal belongings ofthe deceased accused-hayarunnisa, which have absolutely no bearing on the trial of the six absconding co-accused or any other accused. the material objects connected with the crime issomething different, which need to be preserved till trial of all the accused is completed. but the jewellery belonging to the 1st accused-hayarunnisa does not have any bearing on the trial, if it is to be commenced against the absconding accused. there is no dispute that the ornaments belonging to the 1st accused absolutely was collected from her and there is also no dispute that the appellant is the only legal heir, as is evident from the legal heirship certificate produced. the prosecution has no case that the ornaments did not belong to hayarunnisa. there is no indication that the ornaments had anything to do with the crime. under the above circumstances, i find that the impugned order of the learned sessions judge cannotbe sustained. the said order .....

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK MENON TUESDAY, THE 17TH DAY OF MARCH 2020 / 27TH PHALGUNA, 1941 CRL.A.No.333 OF 2020 AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN SC 214/2001 OF I ADDITIONAL DISTRICT COURT & ADDITIONAL MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, KOLLAM APPELLANT/APPLICANT: SHEEBA K., AGED 46 YEARS, D/O.LATE HAYARUNNISA, SHEEBA SADANAM, KALLUVATHUKKAL VILLAGE, KOLLAM TALUK, NOW RESIDING AT ASHANIKUNJAM, KALLUVATHUKKAL P.O., KOLLAM TALUK. BY ADV. SMT.SANGEETHA LAKSHMANA RESPONDENT/STATE: STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM, COCHIN-682018. OTHER PRESENT: SRI.C.S.HRITHWIK, SR.PP THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17.03.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

JUDGMENT

Dated this the 17th day of March 2020 The appellant is the daughter of one Hayarunnisa,

who    was     the     1st    accused       in    S.C.No.214/2001            on    the
files     of     the    Additional           Sessions         Court-I,      Kollam.
The    accused       was      found        guilty      and     convicted.          The

appeal preferred was dismissed and the conviction has

been      made       absolute.              While       she     was    undergoing
imprisonment,           she        passed       away.         Certain       personal
belongings         such       as     MO-226       gold        chain    with       elas
(talisman),          MO-251         gold    chain       with    locket,       MO-252

gold ring with stone, MO-253 ring with picture of Matha Amruthananthamayi, MO-254 ring and MO-225 locket, which were worn by petitioner's mother Hayarunnisa are still in the custody of the Court. The appellant has produced the Legal Heirship Certificate to prove that she is the only legal heir of the deceased, who is entitled to get possession of the material objects. The learned Sessions Judge vide the impugned order dated 19.02.2018 in Crl.M.P.No.99/2018 has observed thus “In para 389 of the judgment it is specifically stated all the material objects shall be preserved even after the termination of appeal if any, as two accused are awaiting trial and six are absconding”. In view of the said observation in the original judgment, the learned Sessions Judge found that the ornaments cannot be released to the petitioner (appellant herein).

2. Heard the learned Counsel appearing for the appellant and the learned Senior Public Prosecutor. It is pertinent to note that the material objects pointed out as above are all personal belongings of

the        deceased           accused-Hayarunnisa,                       which          have
absolutely         no       bearing       on       the        trial        of    the    six
absconding         co-accused         or          any     other       accused.          The
material          objects       connected                with        the        crime    is

something different, which need to be preserved till trial of all the accused is completed. But the jewellery belonging to the 1st accused-Hayarunnisa does not have any bearing on the trial, if it is to be commenced against the absconding accused. There is no dispute that the ornaments belonging to the 1st accused absolutely was collected from her and there is also no dispute that the appellant is the only legal heir, as is evident from the Legal Heirship Certificate produced. The prosecution has no case that the ornaments did not belong to Hayarunnisa. There is no indication that the ornaments had anything to do with the crime. Under the above circumstances, I find that the impugned order of the learned Sessions Judge cannot

be    sustained.                 The     said    order      is     set     aside,
Crl.M.P.No.99/2018                is     allowed      and        the     material
objects,        such        as    MO-226,       MO-251,     MO-252,       MO-253,

MO-254 and MO-225 in S.C.No.214/2001 on the files of the Additional Sessions Court-I, Kollam, are directed to be returned to the appellant as the personal belonging of her mother, on proper acknowledgment. Sd/- ASHOK MENON dkr JUDGE APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: ANNEXURE A1 COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES FROM PAGES 1 TO 9; 427 TO 436; AND 515 TO 522 OF THE

JUDGMENT DATED 16.07.2002 IN S.C.NO.

KOLLAM.

ANNEXURE A2                 COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 11.12.2002 OF THE
                            SESSIONS   COURT,  KOLLAM  IN  CRL.M.P.NO.
ANNEXURE A3                 COPY OF THE REPORTS DATED 13.03.2009,
                            18.03.2009,   21.03.2009   AND   23.03.2009

PERTAINING TO THE APPELLANT'S MOTHER. ANNEXURE A4 COPY OF DEATH CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF URBAN AFFAIRS, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA ON THE DEATH OF HAYARUNNISA, THE APPELLANT'S MOTHER, ON 31.03.2009. ANNEXURE A5 COPY OF DEATH CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF URBAN AFFAIRS, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA ON THE DEATH OF RAJAN.S, THE APPELLANT'S FATHER ON 28.09.2011. ANNEXURE A6 COPY OF THE LEGAL HEIR SHIP CERTIFICATES DATED 28.05.2012 AND 21.08.2017 ISSUED BY THE THAHSILDAR, KOLLAM PERTAINING TO THE APPELLANT'S PARENTS.

Same Court & Year Kerala · 2020 Same Parties Sheeba K., vs State of Kerala, Same Judge Honourable Mr. Justice Ashok Menon