High Court Kerala High Court

K.C.Shaji vs State Of Kerala on 6 December, 2010

Kerala High Court
K.C.Shaji vs State Of Kerala on 6 December, 2010
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Crl.MC.No. 3950 of 2010()


1. K.C.SHAJI, S/O.CHACKO,
                      ...  Petitioner
2. TOMY JOSEPH, S/O.JOSE,
3. S.JYOTHI PRAKASH, S/O.K.R.RAJU,

                        Vs



1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY
                       ...       Respondent

                For Petitioner  :SRI.AMJAD ALI

                For Respondent  :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

The Hon'ble MR. Justice M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR

 Dated :06/12/2010

 O R D E R
          M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J.

           ---------------------------------------------
           CRL.M.C.NO.3950 OF 2010
           ---------------------------------------------
            Dated 6th          December, 2010


                          O R D E R

Petitioners, the accused in

C.C.106/2007 on the file of Judicial First

Class Magistrate’s Court-I, Sulthan Bathery

filed Annexure-B petition under Section

311 of Code of Criminal Procedure to recall

Pws.1,2,4 and 5 for further cross

examination, without disclosing any reason

much less valid reason. By Annexure-D

order, Judicial First Class Magistrate

dismissed the petition. Petitioner

challenged that order before Sessions

Court, Wayanad in Crl.R.P.12/2010. By

Annexure-F order the revision was

dismissed. Petition is filed under Section

482 of Code of Criminal Procedure to quash

Crmc 3950/10
2

Annexures-D and F orders.

2. Learned counsel appearing for the

petitioners was heard.

3. Argument of the learned counsel

appearing for the petitioner is that case

originally ended in acquittal and learned

Sessions Judge finding that the order of

acquittal is unmerited, set aside the order of

acquittal and remanded the case for fresh

disposal to the Magistrate and in such

circumstances, opportunity should have been

granted to recall Pws.1, 2, 4 and 5 as sought

for.

4. On hearing the learned counsel

and going through Annexures-D and F orders, I

do not find any reason to interfere with the

orders passed by the learned Magistrate and the

revisional Court. Annexure-B petition does

Crmc 3950/10
3

not disclose any valid reason for recalling

Pws.1,2,4 and 5 who were examined and cross

examined earlier. In such circumstances,

petition is dismissed.

M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,
JUDGE.

uj.

Crmc 3950/10
4