Ninan Thayyil Vs. State of Kerala - Court Judgment

SooperKanoon Citationsooperkanoon.com/1014632
CourtKerala High Court
Decided OnJan-18-2013
JudgeHONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR
AppellantNinan Thayyil
RespondentState of Kerala
Excerpt:
in the high court of kerala at ernakulam present: the honourable mr.justice t.r.ramachandran nair friday, the 18th day of january 2013 28th pousha 193 crl.mc.no. 278 of 2013 () ------------------------- cc.536/2010 of judicial first class magistrate courti, alappuzha crime no. 141/2000 of alappuzha south police station , alappuzha petitioner(s): ---------------------- 1. ninan thayyil, aged 4 years residing at 258/659,west end marg, saidulajab, new delhi-11”2. james j.thayyil, aged 4 years residing at 258/659,west end marg, saidulajab, new delhi-110 030. by adv. sri.vellayani sundararaju respondent : ---------------------- state of kerala represented by the public prosecutor high court of kerala,ernakulam-682031. by public prosecutor smt. v.h. jasmine this criminal misc. case having come up for admission on 18-01-2013, along with crmc. 291/2013, crmc. 292/2013, crmc. 293/2013, the court on the same day passed the following: bp crl.mc.no. 278 of 2013 () appendix petitioner's annexures : annexure a1: copy of the fi r registered in crime no. 139/2000 dt 5/4/2000 of the south police station, alappuzha. annexure a2: copy of demand draft of canara bank dt 28/08/1999 of rs. 1,07, 5000/- taken by the defacto complainant in favour of 3rd accused. respondent's annexres : nil. //true copy// p.a. to judge bp t.r. ramachandran nair, j.-------------------------------------------------- crl. m.c. nos.278, 291, 292 & 293 of 201.-------------------------------------------------- dated this the 18th day of january, 2013. order the petitioners are same in all the cases. they are seeking to quash the proceedings in c.c.nos.536/2010, 534/2010, 535/2010 and 537/2010 pending before the judicial first class magistrate court-i, alappuzha. learned counsel for the petitioners mainly pointed out that the cases were registered in the year 2000 and the petitioners have been languishing and the non termination of the proceedings is clearly a matter which results in harassment of the petitioners. it is, therefore, submitted that it will be clearly an abuse of the process of the court to continue the proceedings.2. one of the points raised by the petitioners is that some of the charge witnesses are not even in this country and even though steps have been taken by the court on different occasions, the same could not succeed and only in one case crl.m.c.nos.278/2013 & conn. cases 2 namely, c.c.no.535/2010, the complainant was examined. it is submitted that it will be a never ending trial as far as the petitioners are concerned if the court is not terminating the proceedings.3. in the light of the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioners, a report was called for from the learned magistrate. the report shows various details with regard to the progress of the case. the 3rd accused in all the cases is absconding and the accused nos.1 and 2 are standing trial. in c.c.no.534/2010, charge was framed on 04.10.2010. cw1 is reported to be in london and cws 3 and 4 have been summoned and the case stands posted to 28.01.2013. as far as c.c.no.535/2010 is concerned, cw1 was examined as pw1 on 25.01.2011 and though cw3 appeared on 23.08.2012, the counsel for the accused was absent for cross examination. now the case stands posted for return of bailable warrants of cws 4 and 5 to 28.01.2013. as far as c.c.no.536/2010 is concerned, the case stands posted for return of bailable warrant of cw4 and crl.m.c.nos.278/2013 & conn. cases 3 for summons to cw5 to 28.01.2013. as regards c.c.no.537/2010, cw1 appeared on 23.08.2012 but the counsel for the accused was absent for cross examination. summons have been ordered to cws 5 and 6 and the case stands posted to 28.01.2013 for return of summons of cw5 and for a return of bailable warrant of cw6. it is further stated in the report that witnesses 2 to 4 in each of the four cases are the complainants in the other three cases. it also shows that the learned magistrate decided to examine the available witnesses for the purpose of expediting the trial after taking the charge of the court on 21.05.2012.4. learned counsel for the petitioners relied upon various decisions especially the judgment of the high court of madras in crl.o.p.no.27949/2009 to contend for the position that the remaining witnesses are not corroborating the evidence and hence there is no purpose in proceeding with the prosecution case. at this stage, this court need not go into the said question. in this case, the court is trying to complete the steps and now crl.m.c.nos.278/2013 & conn. cases 4 the case is posted to 28.01.2013. as rightly pointed out by the learned counsel for the petitioners all efforts will be taken to complete the steps and for culmination of trial since it is a very old case according to the petitioners. these crl. m.cs are disposed of accordingly. t.r. ramachandran nair judge smp
Judgment:

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR FRIDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF JANUARY 2013 28TH POUSHA 193 Crl.MC.No. 278 of 2013 () ------------------------- CC.536/2010 OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURTI, ALAPPUZHA CRIME NO. 141/2000 OF ALAPPUZHA SOUTH POLICE STATION , ALAPPUZHA PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- 1. NINAN THAYYIL, AGED 4 YEARS RESIDING AT 258/659,WEST END MARG, SAIDULAJAB, NEW DELHI-11”

2. JAMES J.

THAYYIL, AGED 4 YEARS RESIDING AT 258/659,WEST END MARG, SAIDULAJAB, NEW DELHI-110 030. BY ADV. SRI.VELLAYANI SUNDARARAJU RESPONDENT : ---------------------- STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA,ERNAKULAM-682031. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT. V.H. JASMINE THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18-01-2013, ALONG WITH CRMC. 291/2013, CRMC. 292/2013, CRMC. 293/2013, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: BP Crl.MC.No. 278 of 2013 () APPENDIX PETITIONER'S ANNEXURES : ANNEXURE A1: COPY OF THE FI R REGISTERED IN CRIME NO. 139/2000 DT 5/4/2000 OF THE SOUTH POLICE STATION, ALAPPUZHA. ANNEXURE A2: COPY OF DEMAND DRAFT OF CANARA BANK DT 28/08/1999 OF RS. 1,07, 5000/- TAKEN BY THE DEFACTO COMPLAINANT IN FAVOUR OF 3RD ACCUSED. RESPONDENT'S ANNEXRES : NIL. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE BP T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J.

-------------------------------------------------- Crl. M.C. Nos.278, 291, 292 & 293 OF 201.-------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 18th day of January, 2013. ORDER

The petitioners are same in all the cases. They are seeking to quash the proceedings in C.C.Nos.536/2010, 534/2010, 535/2010 and 537/2010 pending before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Alappuzha. Learned counsel for the petitioners mainly pointed out that the cases were registered in the year 2000 and the petitioners have been languishing and the non termination of the proceedings is clearly a matter which results in harassment of the petitioners. It is, therefore, submitted that it will be clearly an abuse of the process of the court to continue the proceedings.

2. One of the points raised by the petitioners is that some of the charge witnesses are not even in this country and even though steps have been taken by the court on different occasions, the same could not succeed and only in one case Crl.M.C.Nos.278/2013 & conn. cases 2 namely, C.C.No.535/2010, the complainant was examined. It is submitted that it will be a never ending trial as far as the petitioners are concerned if the court is not terminating the proceedings.

3. In the light of the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioners, a report was called for from the learned Magistrate. The report shows various details with regard to the progress of the case. The 3rd accused in all the cases is absconding and the accused Nos.1 and 2 are standing trial. In C.C.No.534/2010, charge was framed on 04.10.2010. CW1 is reported to be in London and CWs 3 and 4 have been summoned and the case stands posted to 28.01.2013. As far as C.C.No.535/2010 is concerned, CW1 was examined as PW1 on 25.01.2011 and though CW3 appeared on 23.08.2012, the counsel for the accused was absent for cross examination. Now the case stands posted for return of bailable warrants of CWs 4 and 5 to 28.01.2013. As far as C.C.No.536/2010 is concerned, the case stands posted for return of bailable warrant of CW4 and Crl.M.C.Nos.278/2013 & conn. cases 3 for summons to CW5 to 28.01.2013. As regards C.C.No.537/2010, CW1 appeared on 23.08.2012 but the counsel for the accused was absent for cross examination. Summons have been ordered to CWs 5 and 6 and the case stands posted to 28.01.2013 for return of summons of CW5 and for a return of bailable warrant of CW6. It is further stated in the report that witnesses 2 to 4 in each of the four cases are the complainants in the other three cases. It also shows that the learned Magistrate decided to examine the available witnesses for the purpose of expediting the trial after taking the charge of the court on 21.05.2012.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners relied upon various decisions especially the judgment of the High Court of Madras in Crl.O.P.No.27949/2009 to contend for the position that the remaining witnesses are not corroborating the evidence and hence there is no purpose in proceeding with the prosecution case. At this stage, this Court need not go into the said question. In this case, the court is trying to complete the steps and now Crl.M.C.Nos.278/2013 & conn. cases 4 the case is posted to 28.01.2013. As rightly pointed out by the learned counsel for the petitioners all efforts will be taken to complete the steps and for culmination of trial since it is a very old case according to the petitioners. These Crl. M.Cs are disposed of accordingly. T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR JUDGE smp