Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

MUTHAPPAN,S/O.SUBRAMANIAN,K.D.H.VILLAGE versus STATE OF KERALA REP.BY THE

High Court of Kerala

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


MUTHAPPAN,S/O.SUBRAMANIAN,K.D.H.VILLAGE v. STATE OF KERALA REP.BY THE - Crl MC No. 1938 of 2007 [2007] RD-KL 11273 (26 June 2007)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Crl MC No. 1938 of 2007()

1. MUTHAPPAN,S/O.SUBRAMANIAN,K.D.H.VILLAGE
... Petitioner

Vs

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

For Petitioner :SRI.V.K.SUNIL

For Respondent : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT

Dated :26/06/2007

O R D E R

R. BASANT, J.

CRL.M.C.NOs. 1938 & 1939 OF 2007

Dated this the 26th day of June, 2007

ORDER

The grievance of the petitioners is that warrants of arrest have been issued against them unnecessarily. The cases were posted for hearing on the question of framing charge and the learned Special Judge had issued non-bailable warrants dismissing the applications for condoning the absence of the petitioners.

2. I am certainly of opinion that on a day when the cases were posted for hearing on the question of framing charge, the presence of the petitioners through counsel is more than sufficient and it is not necessary for the courts to insist on the personal presence of the accused on such dates when they are represented by their counsel. CRL.M.C.NOs. 1938 & 1939 OF 2007 -: 2 :-

3. Be that as it may, no further action appears to be necessary in these petitions considering the report submitted by the learned Special Judge.

4. These Crl.M.Cs. are, in these circumstances, dismissed as agreed. Sd/-

(R. BASANT, JUDGE)

Nan/ //true copy// P.S. to Judge CRL.M.C.NOs. 1938 & 1939 OF 2007 -: 3 :-

R. BASANT, J.

CRL.M.C.NO. 1938 OF 2007

Dated this the 15th day of June, 2007

ORDER

The short grievance of the petitioner is that on a day when the personal appearance of the petitioner was not necessary and on which day he was absent for reasons beyond his control, though an application to excuse his absence was filed by his counsel, the learned Special Judge rejected the application for no valid reason. The matter was posted for hearing on the question of charge and therefore the learned counsel could have proceeded with the matter in the absence of the accused.

2. Call for a report from the learned Special Judge as to the circumstances under which the petition was dismissed. A copy of the order passed on the application shall also be made available to this Court. Call on 25/6/07.

3. The warrant issued against the petitioner shall not be executed till that date. He shall appear before the learned CRL.M.C.NOs. 1938 & 1939 OF 2007 -: 4 :- Special Judge on the next date of posting to continue the proceedings.

(R. BASANT, JUDGE)

Nan/


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.