Subramanian vs Radha - Court Judgment

SooperKanoon Citationsooperkanoon.com/1607988
CourtKerala High Court
Decided OnDec-08-2021
Case NumberCRL.A/1510/2006
JudgeHonourable Dr. Justice Kauser Edappagath
AppellantSubramanian
RespondentRADHA
Excerpt:
crl.a no. 1510 of 2006 1in the high court of kerala at ernakulampresent the honourable dr. justice kauser edappagath wednesday, the 8th day of december 2021 / 17th agrahayana, crl.a no. 1510 of 2006 against the judgment in crl.a no. 44/2004 of the sessions court, palakkadappellant/complainant: subramanian s/o.narayanan, nedungottil house, chittur, by adv sri.h.badaruddin respondents/accused: 1 radha w/o.raman, devangapuram, chittur taluk, 2 state of kerala represented by the public prosecutor, high court of kerala,, ernakulam. by advs. sri.v.chitambaresh sri.t.c.suresh menon sri sanal p raj,pp this criminal appeal having come up for admission on 08.12.2021, the court on the same day delivered the following: crl.a no. 1510 of 2006 2judgmentthis appeal has been preferred against acquittal. the counsel for the appellant reported no instructions. the counsel for the 1st respondent submits that, to his knowledge, the appellant is no more. the appellant is absent today. in the said circumstance, the criminal appeal is dismissed for default. sd/- dr. kauser edappagath judge ab
Judgment:

CRL.A NO. 1510 OF 2006 1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE KAUSER EDAPPAGATH WEDNESDAY, THE 8TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2021 / 17TH AGRAHAYANA, CRL.A NO. 1510 OF 2006 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN CRL.A NO. 44/2004 OF THE SESSIONS COURT, PALAKKAD

APPELLANT/COMPLAINANT: SUBRAMANIAN S/O.NARAYANAN, NEDUNGOTTIL HOUSE, CHITTUR, BY ADV SRI.H.BADARUDDIN RESPONDENTS/ACCUSED: 1 RADHA W/O.RAMAN, DEVANGAPURAM, CHITTUR TALUK, 2 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA,, ERNAKULAM. BY ADVS. SRI.V.CHITAMBARESH SRI.T.C.SURESH MENON SRI SANAL P RAJ,PP THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08.12.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: CRL.A NO. 1510 OF 2006 2

JUDGMENT

This appeal has been preferred against acquittal. The counsel for the appellant reported no instructions. The counsel for the 1st respondent submits that, to his knowledge, the appellant is no more. The appellant is absent today. In the said circumstance, the Criminal Appeal is dismissed for default. Sd/- DR. KAUSER EDAPPAGATH JUDGE ab