C.K.Damodaran v. E.P.Dinesan

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.HARILAL THURSDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF JUNE 2015/21ST JYAISHTA, 1937 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 1 of 2003 ------------------------------ AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN Crl.A 391/1999 of ADDL.DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE FAST TRACK (ADHOC)-II, KOZHIKODE DATED 07-11-2002 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN CC 100/1996 of JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE -II(MOBILE), KOZHIKODE, DATED 09-07-1999 REVISION PETITIONER(S)/APPELLANT/ACCUSED:

------------------------------------------ C.K.DAMODARAN NAIR, S/O. CHERUKUNNUMMAL AMMALU AMMA, ACHOTH HOUSE VELLIPARAMBA.

BY ADV. SRI.P.V.KUNHI KRISHNAN RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT AND STATE: -------------------------------------------------

1. E.P.DINESAN S/O. GOPALAN, ELIYOTTUPOYILIL, ELAKKARA AMSOM, KOZHIKODE TALUK

2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.

R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.JUSTINE JACOB.

THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 11-06-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

stu

K.HARILAL, J.

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = Crl.R.P.No. 1 of 2003 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = ==== Dated this the 11th day of June, 2015

ORDER

The learned counsel for the revision petitioner submits that the counsel has no instruction from the client. So, he is unable to cure the defect. In view of the above submission, it could be reasonably presumed that the petitioner is not interested to prosecute the matter. Hence, this revision petition will stand dismissed as not pressed. Sd/- K.HARILAL, JUDGE.

stu //True copy// P.A to Judge