Abdul Latheef vs State Of Kerala
2021 Latest Caselaw 11528 Ker

Crl.A.Nos.1871 &
1872 of 2006                                1

           IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                           PRESENT

             THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAVI

  THURSDAY, THE 08TH DAY OF APRIL 2021 / 18TH CHAITHRA, 1943

                    CRL.A.No.1871 OF 2006

    AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN MC 38/2004 (SC 176/2001) DATED
 03-11-2004 OF ADDITIONAL SESSIONS COURT, FAST TRACK COURT-I,
                          ALAPPUZHA


APPELLANTS/COUNTER PETITIONERS:

      1     ABDUL LATHEEF, S/O. ABOOBACKER KUNJU,
            KURUSHUM PARAMBIL, VEEYAPURAM MURI,
            VIJAYAPURAM VILLAGE, KARTHIKAPPALLY TALUK.

      2     HAKKIM SHAFEEK, S/O.NAZAR,
            NAZAR MANZIL, KURATTIKADUMURI,
            MANNAR VILLAGE, CHENGANNUR TALUK.

            BY ADVS.
            SRI.BIJILY JOSEPH
            SRI.GEORGE MATHEW

RESPONDENT/PETITIONER:

            STATE OF KERALA,
            REP. BY CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
            NORTH POLICE, STATION, ALAPPUZHA,
            THROUGH PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
            HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.

             BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT. S.L. SYLAJA

     THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY          HEARD   ON
31-03-2021,   ALONG  WITH   CRL.A.1872/2006, THE      COURT    ON
08-04-2021 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 Crl.A.Nos.1871 &
1872 of 2006                                2


           IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                           PRESENT

             THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAVI

  THURSDAY, THE 08TH DAY OF APRIL 2021 / 18TH CHAITHRA, 1943

                    CRL.A.No.1872 OF 2006

 AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN MC 24/2004 (SC 176/2001) DATED
 03-11-2004 OF ADDITIONAL SESSIONS COURT, FAST TRACK COURT-I,
                          ALAPPUZHA


APPELLANTS/COUNTER PETITIONERS:

      1     VINOD VARGHESE, S/O. M.G.VARGHESE,
            PARAYAKATTU PADEETTATHIL VEEDU,
            CHENNITHALA, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT.

      2     MUHAMMED SHERIFF, S/O. ABDUL RAHMANKUTTY,
            CHETTIVELIKKAKATHU MUTTEL, THONDANKULANGARA WARD,
            ARYAD THEKKU VILLAGE, AMBALAPPUZHA TALUK.

      3     SUSAN, W/O.PAULOSE,
            CHEEVELIL, CHENNITHALA PANCHAYATH,
            ERAMATHUR WARD, NO.II,
            THRIPPUNITHURA VILLAGE, MAVELIKKARA.

            BY ADV. SRI.GEORGE MATHEW

RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT:

            STATE OF KERALA,
            REP. BY CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
            NORTH POLICE STATION,, ALAPPUZHA, THROUGH THE
            PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
             HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.

            BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT.S.L.SYLAJA

     THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY          HEARD   ON
31-03-2021,   ALONG  WITH   CRL.A.1871/2006, THE      COURT    ON
08-04-2021 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 Crl.A.Nos.1871 &
1872 of 2006                                     3




                              JUDGMENT

Dated this the 8th day of April 2021

The counter petitioners in M.C.No.38/2004 and

M.C.No.24/2004 in S.C.No.176/2001 of the Additional Sessions

Judge, Fast Track Court I, Alappuzha, have filed Crl.Appeal

Nos.1871 and 1872 of 2006, challenging the orders dated

03.11.2004, whereby they have been imposed with a penalty of

₹5,000/- each, as undertaken by them in the bonds executed before

the committal court.

2. S.C.No.176 of 2001 was initiated against 6 accused, for

offence under Section 55(a) of the Abkari Act, upon a charge sheet

filed by the Circle Inspector of Police, Alappuzha North Police

Station. The accused Nos.5 and 6 who had been arrested and

released on bail, jumped the bail and were not available at the time

of trial. The State had then filed petitions seeking action against the

sureties under Section 446 of the Criminal Procedure Code.

M.C.No.38 of 2004 is the proceedings initiated against the sureties

of the 5th accused and M.C.No.24 of 2004 is the proceedings

initiated against the 6th accused.

3. It is seen from the order that subsequent to the filing of Crl.A.Nos.1871 &

the above petitions, the accused had appeared before the Court.

However, since there was a violation of the bond conditions, the

court below has issued the impugned orders, imposing the penalty

of Rs.5,000/- on the appellants. It is aggrieved by the above order,

the appellants have come up before this Court.

4. Heard Sri.George Mathew, learned counsel on behalf of

the appellants in both the appeals and Smt.Sylaja, learned Public

Prosecutor on behalf of the State.

5. When the case had come up for orders today, the counsel

for the appellants submitted that out of the 6 accused in the

sessions case, the 1st accused is no more and the 2 nd accused was

absconding. It is submitted that the trial court had after trial, found

the accused 1,3 and 4 guilty of the offences and convicted them

and sentenced them. The accused 5 and 6, with respect to whom

the appeals are concerned were acquitted by the trial court. It is

also submitted that the accused who were found guilty had filed

Crl.Appeal No. 1101 of 2005 before this Court and this Court had by

judgment dated 18.2.2019 allowed the appeal and acquitted the

accused 1,3 and 4 also of the offence. I have called for the

judgment in Crl.Appeal No.1101 of 2005 and confirmed that the

submission made by the counsel is factually correct. As such all the Crl.A.Nos.1871 &

accused in the sessions case except the 2 nd accused who was

absconding stand acquitted as on today.

6. In the light of the subsequent events, I am of the opinion

that the sureties need not be burdened with any further penalty.

In the result, the appeal is allowed and the order of the court

below is set aside. There will be no order as to costs.

Sd/-

T.R.RAVI, JUDGE

dsn