Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

V. SUDHEER KUMAR versus STATE OF KERALA

High Court of Kerala

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


V. SUDHEER KUMAR v. STATE OF KERALA - Crl Rev Pet No. 534 of 2006(B) [2006] RD-KL 181 (11 July 2006)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Crl Rev Pet No. 534 of 2006(B)

1. V. SUDHEER KUMAR, S/O. VELUKUTTY,
... Petitioner

Vs

1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY
... Respondent

For Petitioner :SRI.C.C.THOMAS

For Respondent :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT

Dated :11/07/2006

O R D E R

R. BASANT, J.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Crl.R.P.Nos. 534 & 541 of 2006
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Dated this the 11th day of July, 2006

O R D E R

These revision petitions are filed by the petitioners, who are witnesses cited by the prosecution in C.P.No.162 of 2005, pending before the Magistrate Court -I, Neyyattinkara, alleging offences punishable, inter alia, under the provisions of the Kerala Abkari Act against the indictees. The short prayer made by them in these revision petitions is that certain articles seized from their possession may be released to them.

2. Their applications to that effect under Section 451 Cr.P.C. were rejected by the learned Magistrate and it is in these circumstances that the petitioners have come before this Court with these revision petitions challenging the orders dismissing the applications under Section 451 Cr.P.C.

3. When these petitions came up for hearing, the learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that they are prepared to abide Crl.R.P.Nos. 534 & 541 of 2006 2 by any reasonable conditions, which may be insisted by the learned Magistrate in compliance with the decision of the Supreme Court in Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai v. State of Gujarat (2003 (2) KT 1089). Subject to appropriate conditions, the documents/articles may be directed to be released to the petitioners, it is prayed.

4. The learned Prosecutor was directed to take instructions. The learned Prosecutor submits that the State has no objection in the articles being released to the petitioners subject to appropriate conditions and safeguards in the interest of proper prosecution of the indictees.

5. In the light of the submissions made, I am satisfied that these revision petitions can be allowed and the court below can be directed to consider the release of the articles/documents on appropriate terms and conditions as insisted by the decision referred above.

6. These revision petitions are accordingly allowed. The impugned orders are set aside. The court below shall dispose of the applications afresh. Crl.R.P.Nos. 534 & 541 of 2006 3 (R. BASANT) Judge tm


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.