Jithin Prasad v. State Of Kerala
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE B.KEMAL PASHA THURSDAY, THE 3RD DAY OF DECEMBER 2015/12TH AGRAHAYANA, 1937 Crl.MC.No. 7225 of 2015 () --------------------------- CRL.M.P.NO.296/2015 IN S.C.NO.1254/2010 OF THE PRINCIPAL ASSISTANT SESSIONS COURT, KOLLAM CP 42/2009 of JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE'S COURT-I, KOLLAM CRIME NO. 568/2008 OF KUNDARA POLICE STATION, KOLLAM PETITIONERS/ACCUSED:
--------------------
1. JITHIN PRASAD, AGED 29 YEARS, S/O.PRASAD, KOLLANAZHIKATHU VEEDU, PERAYAM CHERRY, MULAVANA VILLAGE, KOLLAM DISTRICT.
2. G.MADHU PRASAD, AGED 25 YEARS, S/O.PRASAD, KOLLANAZHIKATHU VEEDU, PERAYAM CHERRY, MULAVANA VILLAGE, KOLLAM DISTRICT.
BY ADVS.SRI.K.SIJU SMT.S.SEETHA RESPONDENT/STATE:
----------------- STATE OF KERALA THROUGH THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KUNDARA POLICE STATION, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM-682 031.
BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT.MAYA THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03-12-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
DSV/7/12/15
Crl.MC.No. 7225 of 2015 () --------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONERS' ANNEXURES :
------------------------ ANNEXURE 1: COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN CRIME NO.568/2008 OF KUNDARA POLICE STATION.
ANNEXURE 2: COPY OF THE PETITION IN CRL.MP.NO.296/2015 DATED 03.11.2015.
ANNEXURE 3: COPY OF THE ORDER IN CRL.MP.296/2015 IN SC.NO.1254/2010 DATED 03.11.2015.
RESPONDENT'S ANNEXURES:
----------------------- NIL // True Copy // P.A. To Judge DSV/7/12/15
B. KEMAL PASHA, J.
................................................................ Crl.M.C. No. 7225 of 2015 ............................................................... Dated this the 3rd day of December, 2015
O R D E R
The challenge is with regard to Annexure 3 order passed by the learned Principal Assistant Sessions Judge, Kollam in Crl.M.P. No.296/2015 in S.C.No.1254/2010. 2.
It seems that PWs.1 and 2 were examined and they were cross-examined in detail by the then learned counsel appearing for the petitioner in the matter. After that there was a change of vakkalath. Then, wisdom prevailed upon the subsequent counsel to seek for recalling of those witnesses for subjecting them again to cross-examination. The said request was vehemently opposed by the learned Public Prosecutor. The court below was satisfied that those witnesses were properly cross-examined and there was no
Crl.M.C. 7225 of 2015 -: 2 :- need for any further application of Section 311 Cr.P.C. in the matter.
3.
On going through Annexure 3 order and on hearing the learned counsel for the petitioners, this Court is of the view that there is absolutely nothing to interfere with Annexure 3 order. Therefore, there is no merit in this Crl.M.C. and it is only to be dismissed, and I do so. It seems that this is a very old sessions case. Let the trial be expedited.
With the above observation, this Crl.M.C. is dismissed. Sd/- B.KEMAL PASHA, JUDGE ul/- [True copy] P.S. to Judge