Indusekharan vs Unnikrishnan - Court Judgment

SooperKanoon Citationsooperkanoon.com/1626293
CourtKerala Orders High Court
Decided OnDec-22-2021
Case NumberCrl.Rev.Pet/1084/2010
JudgeHonourable Dr. Justice Kauser Edappagath
AppellantIndusekharan
RespondentUnnikrishnan
Excerpt:
in the high court of kerala at ernakulampresent the honourable dr. justice kauser edappagath wednesday, the 22nd day of december 2021 / 1st pousha, 1943 against the order in cra 372/2005 of additional district court(adhoc ii), thrissur cc 505/2004 of judicial magistrate of first class , kodungallurrevision petitioner: indusekharan palakkath house, thekkumkavu village,, thrissur. by adv sri.t.n.manoj respondents: 1 unnikrishnan kizhakke palakath house, thekkumkara village,, mukundapuram taluk. 2 state of kerala represented by public prosecutor, high court of kerala. smt maya m n,pp this criminal revision petition having come up for admission on 22.12.2021, the court on the same day delivered the following:orderthe learned counsel for the revision petitioner submits that both the revision petitioner and the complainant are no more and hence the revision has become infructuous. accordingly, this revision petition is dismissed as infructuous. sd/- dr. kauser edappagath judge aj/22.12.2021
Judgment:

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE KAUSER EDAPPAGATH WEDNESDAY, THE 22ND DAY OF DECEMBER 2021 / 1ST POUSHA, 1943 AGAINST THE ORDER IN CRA 372/2005 OF ADDITIONAL DISTRICT COURT(ADHOC II), THRISSUR CC 505/2004 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS , KODUNGALLUR

REVISION PETITIONER: INDUSEKHARAN PALAKKATH HOUSE, THEKKUMKAVU VILLAGE,, THRISSUR. BY ADV SRI.T.N.MANOJ RESPONDENTS: 1 UNNIKRISHNAN KIZHAKKE PALAKATH HOUSE, THEKKUMKARA VILLAGE,, MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK. 2 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA. SMT MAYA M N,PP THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22.12.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

ORDER

The learned counsel for the revision petitioner submits that both the revision petitioner and the complainant are no more and hence the revision has become infructuous. Accordingly, this revision petition is dismissed as infructuous. Sd/- DR. KAUSER EDAPPAGATH JUDGE AJ/22.12.2021