Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

BIJU, S/O. SREDHARAN versus STATE OF KERALA

High Court of Kerala

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


BIJU, S/O. SREDHARAN v. STATE OF KERALA - Crl MC No. 830 of 2004 [2006] RD-KL 2170 (30 November 2006)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Crl MC No. 830 of 2004()

1. BIJU, S/O. SREDHARAN,
... Petitioner

Vs

1. STATE OF KERALA,
... Respondent

2. SURENDRAN, SON OF NANU,

For Petitioner :SRI.GEORGE VARGHESE(PERUMPALLIKUTTIYIL)

For Respondent :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.R.UDAYABHANU

Dated :30/11/2006

O R D E R

K.R. UDAYABHANU, J.

CRL.M.C. NO.830 of 2004 Dated 10th day of November, 2006

ORDER

The petitioner has challenged the correctness of the order of the court below under section 451 Cr.P.C. awarding interim custody of the articles allegedly stolen from his house by his father-in-law. The petitioner as well as the 2nd respondent - father- in- law had applied before court under section 451 Cr.P.C. with respect to the articles seized by the police, i.e. sony TV-21, godrej fridge, washing machine and gas cylinder . It is the case of the petitioner that the above articles were stolen by his mother-in-law, brother-in-law and co-brother from his residence on 16-9-2003 on the date of cremation of his father who died on 15-9-2003. The court below has ordered interim custody of the T.V., fridge and washing machine to the 2nd respondent and gas cylinder to the petitioner herein on the basis of the documents produced showing the ownership of the respective articles. It is the contention of the petitioner that in view of the fact that the above articles were recovered by police and one of the items i.e., gas cylinder was found to be fully CRMC830/04 2 owned by the petitioner, entrusting the custody of the rest of the articles with the 2nd respondent was improper. It is submitted that there was estranged relationship with the petitioner and his wife. In the circumstances and in view of the fact that the court has ordered interim custody on the basis of the documents produced and that the custody given is only for the period pendente lite, no interference is called for. The Crl.M.C. is dismissed. All the same, the court below is directed to dispose of the main case pending in the matter at the earliest at any rate within 4 months from the date of receipt of this order if the final report has been filed. The Crl.M.C. is disposed of as above

K.R.UDAYABHANU,JUDGE.

kvm/-


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.