Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

MURALI NARAYANA MENON, AGED 53 YEARS versus STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY

High Court of Kerala

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


MURALI NARAYANA MENON, AGED 53 YEARS v. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY - Crl MC No. 4011 of 2006 [2006] RD-KL 3085 (11 December 2006)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Crl MC No. 4011 of 2006()

1. MURALI NARAYANA MENON, AGED 53 YEARS,
... Petitioner

Vs

1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY
... Respondent

2. VENU @ MURALI MOHAN, AGED 40 YEARS,

3. DEEPU, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS,

For Petitioner :SRI.JACOB SEBASTIAN

For Respondent : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT

Dated :11/12/2006

O R D E R

R.BASANT, J.

Crl.M.C.NO.4011 OF 2006

Dated this the 11th day of December, 2006.

ORDER

The grievance of the petitioner is that no orders have been passed on the application filed by him before the learned Judicial First Class Magistrate-I, Palakkad as Crl.M.P.No.4313 of 2006, a copy of which is produced as Annexure-2. He has filed a private complaint, a copy of which is produced as Annexure-1, and along with that private complaint, Annexure-2 petition has also been filed. The grievance of the petitioner is that while the private complaint filed on 06.12.2006 is posted to 18.12.2006, Crl.M.P (Annexure-2) for search of the premises to trace his motor cycle which he is robbed of, stands posted to 20.12.2006. The submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the learned Magistrate has not imbibed the sense of expedition which must inform him while considering an application like Annexure-2, which has been filed before him.

2. I do not intend to express any opinion on the entitlement of the petitioner for the relief claimed in Annexure-2. But I am in agreement with the learned counsel for the petitioner that Annexure-2 petition deserves to be considered Crl.M.C.NO.4011 OF 2006 2 expeditiously. The learned Magistrate, I direct, must consider Annexure-2 application as expeditiously as possible by advancing the hearing if necessary.

3. Hand over a copy of this order to the learned counsel for the petitioner today itself. R.BASANT

JUDGE

rtr/


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.