Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

GOPALAN AND ORS versus STATE

High Court of Kerala

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


GOPALAN and Ors v. STATE - CRL REF No. 1 of 2007 [2007] RD-KL 1145 (16 January 2007)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

CRL REF No. 1 of 2007()

1. GOPALAN AND OTHERS
... Petitioner

Vs

1. STATE
... Respondent

For Petitioner :.

For Respondent : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT

Dated :16/01/2007

O R D E R

R. BASANT, J.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Crl. Ref.No. 1 of 2007
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Dated this the 16th day of January, 2007

O R D E R

This Reference is registered on the basis of a report dt.28.9.2006 by the learned Sessions Judge, Alleppey. The learned Sessions Judge has brought to the notice of the Court an erroneous committal by the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Mavelikkara wrongly stating that the first accused had also been committed for trial before the learned Sessions Judge when in fact only the third accused had appeared before the learned Magistrate and he alone was committed to the Court of Sessions. In the order passed in C.P. 67 of 2005 it was erroneously stated that both accused 1 and 3 are committed to the Court of Sessions, whereas only the third accused had entered appearance. The learned Sessions Judge prays that the said order of committal, in so far as it relates to the first accused, may be quashed and C.P.No. 33 of 2006, which has subsequently been registered against the said first accused, may be permitted to continue. Crl.Ref.No. 1 of 2007 2

2. I am satisfied in the circumstances that the prayer is justified. As the learned Sessions Judge does not have the jurisdictional competence to suo motu set aside an order of committal, the learned Sessions Judge has been forced to make the present request. I am satisfied that the prayer can be allowed. The committal of the first accused as per order in C.P. 67 of 2005 is hereby quashed and the learned Magistrate is permitted to continue the proceedings for committal of the said first accused as per C.P. 33 of 2006 presently registered before the J.F.C.M. Mavelikkara.

3. This Crl. Reference is accordingly answered. But it must be ensured that such careless mistakes do not occur hereafter. Communicate the order to the learned Sessions Judge forthwith. (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.