Rajeev Gandhi Paddy Processing v. Joshy Mathew

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE B.KEMAL PASHA THURSDAY, THE 3RD DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2015/12TH BHADRA, 1937 OP(Crl.).No. 227 of 2015 (Q) -------------------------------------- CC 239/2004 OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT-II (MOBILE), KOTTAYAM ---------------- PETITIONER(S)/COMPLAINANT:

--------------------------------------------- RAJEEV GANDHI PADDY PROCESSING, PROCURING AND MARKETING CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED NO.K.878, KANJIRAM P.O., KOTTAYAM - 20, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR C.K.DAS, S/O.KARAMBA PANICKER, PEEDIKACHIRA, KILIROOR, THIRUVAARPPU VILLAGE, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. BY ADVS.SRI.A.JAYASANKAR SRI.C.V.MANUVILSAN SRI.MANU GOVIND SRI.S.SABARINADH SMT.INDULEKHA JOSEPH RESPONDENT(S)/ACCUSED:

--------------------------------------- JOSHY MATHEW, S/O.MATHEW, KIZHAKKUMBHAAGATHU VEETTIL, KADAVOORKKARA, KADAVOOR P.O., KOTHAMANGALAM, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT - 686 671.

THIS OP (CRIMINAL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03-09-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PJ

OP(Crl.).No. 227 of 2015 (Q) --------------------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS ------------------------------------- EXT.P-1:

A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGEMENT IN CC NO.239/2004 OF THE JFCM-II, KOTTAYAM DATED 23.6.2004 RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS --------------------------------------- NIL.

/ TRUE COPY / P.S. TO JUDGE PJ

B.KEMAL PASHA, J.

================ O.P.(Crl.) No. 227 of 2015 ======================= Dated this the 3rd day of September, 2015

J U D G M E N T

It seems that the respondent was convicted and sentenced by the Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court-II, (Mobile), Kottayam in C.C.No.239/2004. The respondent has unsuccessfully challenged the conviction and sentence before the 2nd Additional Sessions Court, Thrissur through Crl.Appeal No.384/2004. On the dismissal of the appeal, he has again challenged the matter before this Court through a Criminal Revision. That was also dismissed. The present complaint of the petitioner, who is the complainant, is that no effective steps are being taken for the execution of the warrant against the respondent, who is the accused.

2. As per criminal rules of practice, it is for the first appellate court to get the warrant executed for execution of the sentence. It seems that no such steps are being taken by the 2nd Additional Sessions Court, Kottayam for the same.

3. In the result, the 2nd Additional Sessions Court,

O.P.(Crl.) No. 227 of 2015 Kottayam is directed to take immediate necessary steps for the execution of the warrant against the accused at the earliest, for getting the sentence executed. The court below shall call upon the concerned Police Officials and attempt to get the warrant executed at the earliest.

With the said direction, this O.P.(Crl.) is closed. SdB.KEMAL PASHA, JUDGE stu