Jacky, vs State of Kerala,

JACKY, vs State of Kerala,

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided Aug 03, 2020

~3 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1779354

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/1779354
Court: Kerala High Court
Judge: Honourable Mr.Justice V.G.Arun
Decided On: Aug 03, 2020
Case Number: OP(Crl.)/216/2020

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

JACKY,

Respondent

State of Kerala,

Excerpt

.....police battalion) received by the petitioner from the public service commission.2. in the report called for by this court, the learned magistrate has stated that due to covid-19 op(crl.).no.216 of 2020 ..3..pandemic outbreak very few cases are being taken up from the restricted cause list published in terms of the directions issued by the high court. it is pointed out that altogether 1150 five year old cases are pending and that efforts are being taken to dispose of those cases. it is stated that for framing charge in c.c.no.949 of 2018, presence of the accused is required and that most of the accused are residing in chirayinkeezhu taluk, presently is declared as containment zone.3. the facts forthcoming from the reportdissuades this court from directing the learned magistrate to dispose of c.c.no.949/2018 within a specified time limit. the learned magistrate can only be requested to take into account the fact that the fifth accused would lose his chance of appointment if final decision in the case is unduly delayed and to dispose op(crl.).no.216 of 2020 ..4.. of the case, as expeditiously as possible, without overlooking the priority of five year old cases. the original petition is disposed of accordingly. sd/- v.g.arun sb/05/08/2020 judge op(crl.).no.216 of 2020 ..5.. appendix petitioner's/s exhibits: exhibit p1 the true copy of fir in crime no.2265/2017 of mangalapuram police station, thiruvananthapuram. exhibit p2 the true copy of appointment letter from public service commission dated // true copy // p.a to judge

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.G.ARUN MONDAY, THE 03RD DAY OF AUGUST 2020 / 12TH SRAVANA, 1942 OP(Crl.).No.216 OF 2020 AGAINST THE ORDER IN CC 949/2018 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS -II,ATTINGAL CRIME NO.2265/2017 OF Mangalapuram Police Station , Thiruvananthapuram
PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.5: JACKY, AGED 32 YEARS S/O. KALADHARAN C.K., HOUSE, C.O. NAGAR, PERUNGUZHY, AZHOOR VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.M.R.SARIN RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT: 1 STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2 THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MANGALAPURAM POLICE STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. OTHER PRESENT: PP SREEJA V. THIS OP (CRIMINAL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03.08.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: OP(Crl.).No.216 OF 2020 ..2..

JUDGMENT

Dated this the 3rd day of August 2020 The petitioner is the fifth accused in C.C.NO.949 of 2018 pending before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Attingal. Cognizance was taken by the learned Magistrate based on the final report in Crime No.2265 of 2017 of the Mangalapuram Police Station, registered for offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 149, 447, 294(b), 323, 324, 427, 506(ii) of IPC and Section 27 of the Arms Act. The prayer in this original petition is for an expeditious disposal of C.C.No.948 of 2018. The reason for seeking expeditious disposal is the advice for appointment to the post of Police Constable (Armed Police Battalion) received by the petitioner from the Public Service Commission.

2. In the report called for by this Court, the learned Magistrate has stated that due to Covid-19 OP(Crl.).No.216 OF 2020 ..3..

pandemic outbreak very few cases are being taken up from the restricted cause list published in terms of the directions issued by the High Court. It is pointed out that altogether 1150 five year old cases are pending and that efforts are being taken to dispose of those cases. It is stated that for framing charge in C.C.No.949 of 2018, presence of the accused is required and that most of the accused are residing in Chirayinkeezhu Taluk, presently is declared as containment zone.

3. The facts forthcoming from the report

dissuades this Court from directing the learned Magistrate to dispose of C.C.No.949/2018 within a specified time limit. The learned Magistrate can only be requested to take into account the fact that the fifth accused would lose his chance of appointment if final decision in the case is unduly delayed and to dispose OP(Crl.).No.216 OF 2020 ..4.. of the case, as expeditiously as possible, without overlooking the priority of five year old cases. The original petition is disposed of accordingly. Sd/- V.G.ARUN SB/05/08/2020 JUDGE OP(Crl.).No.216 OF 2020 ..5.. APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1 THE TRUE COPY OF FIR IN CRIME NO.2265/2017 OF MANGALAPURAM POLICE STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. EXHIBIT P2 THE TRUE COPY OF APPOINTMENT LETTER FROM PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION DATED // true copy // P.A to Judge

Same Court & Year Kerala · 2020 Same Parties JACKY, vs State of Kerala, Same Judge Honourable Mr.Justice V.G.Arun