Kerala High Court
Suo Motu Proceedings On The Basis ... vs Unknown on 10 February, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE B.SUDHEENDRA KUMAR
WEDNESDAY, THE 10TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2021 / 21ST MAGHA,1942
Crl.RC.No.11 OF 2020
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CP 100/2019 OF JUDICIAL
MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS, KATTAKKADA
CRIME NO.363/1995 OF Excise Circle Office, Kattakkada
PETITIONER/S:
SUO MOTU PROCEEDINGS ON THE BASIS OF A
LETTER RECEIVED FROM ASST. SESSIONS JUDGE,
NEYYATTINKARA REQUESTING FOR REVISION OF
ORDER DATED 14.01.2020 IN COMMITTAL
PROCEEDINGS NO.100/2019 OF JUDICIAL FIRST
CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, KATTAKKADA.
COMPLAINANT/S:
1) STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE
INSPECTOR OF EXCISE,
EXCISE CIRCLE OFFICE, KATTAKKADA,
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM-682 031.
2) VASANTHA, CHURUVILA, PUTHEN VEEDU, NOOLIYODE,
KOLLAMKONAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 573.
OTHER PRESENT:
SMT. M. K. PUSHPALATHA, SR.PP
THIS CRIMINAL REVISION CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD
ON 10.02.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE
FOLLOWING:
Crl.R.C. No.11 of 2020
-2-
ORDER
This suo motu criminal case was
registered on the basis of the request made
by the learned Assistant Sessions Judge,
Neyyattinkara. The accused in
S.T.No.1050/1995 on the files of the Court
of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class,
Kattakkada was convicted by the trial court
under Section 55(a) of the Abkari Act on
her pleading guilty. However, the trial
court awarded only a sentence of fine of
Rs.150/-. Aggrieved by the inadequacy of
the sentence awarded by the trial court, the
State filed Crl.A.695/1998 before this
Court. This Court, as per the judgment in
Crl.R.C. No.11 of 2020
appeal, set aside the sentence and directed
the trial court to hear the accused and pass
sentence afresh in accordance with law.
Thereafter, the learned Magistrate
mistakenly re-filed the case as
C.P.No.100/2019 and committed the case to
the Sessions Court as per order dated
14.01.2020. The Sessions Court numbered the
case as S.C.No.98/2020 and made over the
case to the Assistant Sessions Court,
Neyyattinkara for trial and disposal in
accordance with law. When the application
for bail was moved by the accused in that
case, the mistake was noticed by the learned
Assistant Sessions Judge concerned.
Accordingly, the above request was made.
Crl.R.C. No.11 of 2020
2. Service is complete. However,
there is no appearance for the second
respondent.
3. Heard the learned Senior Public
Prosecutor.
4. It is clear from judgment dated
15.10.2004 in Crl.A.No.695/1998 that the
learned Magistrate convicted the accused on
her pleading guilty and sentenced her to a
fine of Rs.150/-, against which, appeal was
filed by the State. This Court set aside
the sentence awarded by the trial court in
the appeal filed by the State and directed
the learned Magistrate to pass sentence, in
accordance with law, after granting an
opportunity of hearing to the accused. In
Crl.R.C. No.11 of 2020
view of the above, the trial court was not
justified in committing the case to the
Sessions Court on the simple reason that the
forum of trial had been changed. This being
the position, the committal order dated
14.01.2020 passed by the learned Magistrate
in C.P.No.100/2019 and all further
proceedings cannot be sustained and
consequently, I set aside the same and
restore S.T.No.1050/1995 on the files of the
court below with a direction to the learned
Magistrate to pass sentence afresh, in
accordance with law, as directed by this
Court as per judgment dated 15.10.2004.
In the result, this Crl.R.C. stands
allowed as above. The learned Sessions Judge
Crl.R.C. No.11 of 2020
concerned is directed to transmit all the
records connected with this case to the
Magistrate Court concerned forthwith.
sd/-
B. SUDHEENDRA KUMAR,
JUDGE
STK
