Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

K.VALSAN, S/O. GOVINDAN versus STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY

High Court of Kerala

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


K.VALSAN, S/O. GOVINDAN v. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY - Crl MC No. 530 of 2007 [2007] RD-KL 4355 (27 February 2007)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Crl MC No. 530 of 2007()

1. K.VALSAN, S/O. GOVINDAN,
... Petitioner

Vs

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

For Petitioner :SRI.P.V.SURENDRANATH

For Respondent : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT

Dated :27/02/2007

O R D E R

R.BASANT, J

Crl.M.C.No.530 of 2007

Dated this the 27th day of February 2007

O R D E R

The petitioner faces indictment in a prosecution under Sections 279 and 304 A I.P.C and Section 3(i) read with 181 of the Motor Vehicles Act. The petitioner has come to this court with this petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. He claims to be aggrieved by the order dated 18/12/2004. That order, in turn, shows that a delay of about nine months for filing the chargesheet, was condoned by the learned Magistrate, after giving notice to the petitioner, who did not choose to enter appearance and raise objections.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the matter stands listed for trial to 28/02/2007. No explanation whatsoever is offered as to why the order dated 18/12/2004 was not challenged till this date and the petitioner has come to this court at the eleventh hour with this petition. Admittedly, the matter stands listed for trial and the witnesses will be appearing before the learned Magistrate on 28/02/2007. I am, in these circumstances, satisfied that it is not necessary to invoke the Crl.M.C.No.530/07 2 powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C and interrupt the progress of the trial scheduled to commence on 28/02/2007.

3. In the result, this Criminal Miscellaneous Case is dismissed but I may hasten to observe that the petitioner shall be at liberty to raise all his contentions before the learned Magistrate including the contention that the condonation of delay was not justified and the condonation of delay was without notice to the petitioner.

(R.BASANT, JUDGE)

jsr Crl.M.C.No.530/07 3 Crl.M.C.No.530/07 4

R.BASANT, J

C.R.R.P.No.

ORDER

21ST DAY OF JULY 2006


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.