Court : Kerala
Reported in : 1974CriLJ1107
E.K. Moidu, J.1. The respondent in each of the petitions has been convicted under Section 7(i) read with Section 16(1)(a)(i) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 (Central Act 37 of 1954) -- hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' -- and the respondent in the first of the two petitions was released on admonition under Section 3, and the respondent in the other petition was released on probation of good conduct under Section 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 (Central Act 20 of 1958), without awarding any sentence. The State has filed these two revision petitions questioning the impropriety and illegality of the order.2. The Food Inspector in the first case purchased gingili oil from the respondent and it was found to be adulterated on analysis by the Public Analyst. The purchase of gingili oil, the procedure adopted by the Food Inspector in sampling and the final result of the analysis by the Public Analyst were not disputed, On analysis it was found that the standard of...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : 2006CriLJ2271
K.A. Abdul Gafoor, J.1. This appeal is by accused 1 and 2, a student and his father, in S. C. No. 128/91 on the file of the 5th Additional Special Sessions Court, Thiruvananthapuram. They stand convicted for offences punishable under Sections 120-B, 420, 465, 466, 468 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 3 years each under Sections 420, 466, 468 and 471 with a direction that the sentences shall run concurrently. No separate sentence was ordered under Sections 465 and 120-B IPC. They faced trial with two others for the offences mentioned above. The 3rd accused was acquitted. The 4th accused is no more and the charge against him abated.2. The prosecution case was that they, along with CW. 1, an accused turned approver, hatched a conspiracy in order to forge a mark list of the Pre Degree Examination held in March, 1977 in which the first accused had appeared and to make use of it to secure admission for M. B. B. S. Course in the merit quota f...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : (1966)ILLJ373Ker
P. Govinda Menon, J.1. These four appeals by the State arise out of the judgment of the Second Additional Sessions Judge of Trivandrum in Criminal Appeals Nos. 80, 87, 88 and 89 of 1963 acquitting the respondents-accused who were found guilty and convicted under Rule 41(5) of the Defence of India Rules read with Rule 35(6)(i) and (o) and dealing with them under Section 4(1) of the Probation of Offenders Act. Accused 2 and 4 did not file any appeal. It is against the other accused who were acquitted by the Sessions Judge that the State has filed these different appeals. These appeals were argued together and could conveniently be disposed of by a common judgment.2. The facts that led up to the prosecution may be briefly stated as follows.3. The Trivandrum Port and Headload Workers' Labour Contract Co-operative Society No. 4245 (hereinafter referred to as the principal society), is the authorized clearing contractors of the Government of India, Food Ministry. Another society, the Trivand...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALAAT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K.NARENDRAN WEDNESDAY, THE25H DAYOF FEBRUARY20156TH PHALGUNA, 1936 OP(KAT).No. 80 of 2013 (Z) --------------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER IN TA22932012 of KERALAADMINISTRATIVETRIBUNAL, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DATED2811-2012 PETITIONER: ------------------ SABU JOSEPH A J, PROBATION OFFICER GRADE1 DISTRICT PROBATION OFIFCE COURT CAMPUS, ALAPPUZHA -1. BY ADVS.SRI.S.P.ARAVINDAKSHAN PILLAY SMT.N.SANTHA SRI.K.A.BALAN SRI.PETER JOSE CHRISTO SRI.S.A.ANAND SMT.K.N.REMYA RESPONDENT(S): ---------------------------- 1. STATEOF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT SOCIAL WELFAR DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT THIRUVANANTHAPURAM695001 2. DIRECTOR OF SOCIAL WELFARE DIRECTOR OF SOCIAL WELFARE THIRUVANANTHAPURAM695033. BY SR.GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI P.M.SANEER THIS OP KERALAADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON2711.2014, ALONG WITH OPKAT. 1368/2013, THE COURT ON2502...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : 2005CriLJ4696
K. Padmanabhan Nair, J.1. The State/complainant In Sessions Case 80/ 1996 on the file of the Sessions Court, Kollam is the appellant in this appeal. The respondent was charge sheeted in Crime No. 313/1995 of Kottiyam Police Station alleging that he committed an offence punishable under Section 302 of Indian Penal Code.2. The prosecution case was that at about 8.20 a.m. on 21-11-1995 the respondent committed the murder of one Remanan with the intention and knowledge that his act was likely to cause the death of Remanan. It was alleged that the respondent stabbed Remanan with a knife on the left side of his back and when Remanan turned round, the respondent again stabbed him on the right side of his chest. The victim succumbed to the injuries.3. PW-2 (H. Rajan) gave Ext. PI F. I. statement before PW-8, (S. S. Firoz) the Sub-Inspector of Police who recorded the same and registered Ex.Pl(a) First Information Report. The subsequent investigation was conducted by PW-9, (K. A. John) the Circl...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : (2000)ILLJ1268Ker
A.R. Lakshmanan, J.1. Heard Mr. N. Nadakumara Menon for appellant and Mr. P.G. Parameswara Panicker for respondents.2. The unsuccessful Writ Petitioner is the appellant herein. The Original Petition was filed by the appellant challenging Ext. P8 order passed by the Deputy General Manager, State Bank of India, Ernakulam discharging the appellant from the service of the Bank and seeking a direction to the respondent to reinstate the appellant in service with all consequential benefits with effect from the date of his dismissal, and other allied reliefs.3. The appellant, while working as Clerk-cum-Typist in the 1st respondent Bank, was prosecuted pursuant to a complaint filed by his wife, for the charge of an offence punishable under Section 498A of 'the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter to be referred to as 'I.P.C.'). Section 498A PC deals with the offence of cruelty by husband or his relatives. The Chief Judicial Magistrate, Trichur convicted and sentenced the appellant to undergo rigorous...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.BHAVADASAN THURSDAY, THE19H DAY OF DECEMBER201328TH AGRAHAYANA, 1935 CRL.A.No. 79 of 2009 ( ) ------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN SC5212007 of COURT OF THE ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE, (NDPS ACT CASES), THODUPUZHA, DATED0201.2009 CP572007 of JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT-II, ADIMALI APPELLANT(S)/ACCUSED: ---------------------------------------- ROBIN, S/O.THOMAS, KARIYILAKATTIL HOUSE, ADIKKANATTI BHAGOM PERIINCHAMKUTTY KARA, KONNATHADI VILLAGE. BY ADVS.SRI.P.VIJAYA BHANU SRI.THOMAS J.ANAKKALLUNKAL RESPONDENT(S)/COMPLAINANT: ---------------------------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. DHANESH MATHEW MANJOORAN THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON1912-2013, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ds P.BHAVADASAN, J.- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Crl.A....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : 1962CriLJ652
ORDERP. Govinda Menon, J.1. Cri. R.P. 273/60 is filed by the 2nd accused challenging his conviction under Section 324 IPC, and sentence of rigorous imprisonment for two months awarded to him by the Addl. First Class Magistrate of Ernakulam confirmed by the learned Sessions Judge in Criminal Appeal No. 28 of 1080. Cri. R.P. 420/60 is by P.W. 1 and 4 who are the injured in the case against the acquittal of the 1st accused Under Section 326 I.P.C. and convicting him only under Section 324 I.P.C. and releasing him under the Probation of Offenders Act. Notice was also issued by this Court to show cause why the sentence on the 1st accused should not be enhanced.2. The third accused in the case was acquitted. She is the wife of the 2nd accused and the first accused is their son. They are related to P.W. 1 and are neighbouring cultivators. For some time past there were disputes and litigation regarding the varamba separating their properties. On 18.10.58 it is stated the accused dug up the bun...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : 1987CriLJ1257
ORDERS. Padmanabhan, J.1. In C.C. 441 of 1981 the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Kanjirappally tried three accused for offences punishable under Sections 394 and 109 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. Third accused was acquitted. Accused 1 and 2 were convicted for the offence under Section 394 IPC and each of them was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/- with a default sentence of rigorous imprisonment for two months.2. Crl.A. 80/83 filed by the second accused was allowed by the Sessions Judge, Kottayam and he was acquitted. Crl.A. 81/83 filed by the first accused was partly allowed altering the conviction under S, 394 to one under Section 379 IPC and reducing the sentence to rigorous imprisonment for two years.3. Crl.A. 377/84 was filed by the State challenging the acquittal of the second accused and alteration of the head of conviction as well as reduction of sentence as against the 2nd accused. Crl. R.P. 57/84 was ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.HARIPRASAD THURSDAY, THE11H DAY OF DECEMBER201420TH AGRAHAYANA, 1936 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 1534 of 2003 ( ) --------------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN Crl.APPEAL NO. 269/2001 of ADDITIONAL DISTRICT COURT (FAST TRACK COURT), THODUPUZHA DATED3001-2003. AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN CC2261999 of J.F.C.M - I, IDUKKI DATED1511-2001. REVISION PETITIONER(S)/APPELLANT/ACCUSED NO.2 : ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- JAMES, S/O SIVANANDAN, PUTHUVAL HOUSE, PAREMAVU BHAGOM, IDUKKI VILLAGE, IDUKKI DISTRICT. BY ADVS.SRI.M.P.MOHAMMED ASLAM SRI.P.K.YUSUFF ISSUDDIN SRI.K.M.MOHAMED ABDURAHIMAN. RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT : -------------------------------------------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, THROUGH DEPUTY RANGE OFFICER, VYRAMANY RANGE, VYRAMANY STATION, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.K.K.RA...
Tag this Judgment!