Kerala High Court
Edwin Joseph K J vs State Of Kerala on 1 August, 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V
Tuesday, the 1st day of August 2023 / 10th Sravana, 1945
CRL.MC NO. 5375 OF 2023
CRIME NO.111/2005 OF ERNAKULAM NORTH POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM
CC 529/2018 OF ADDITIONAL CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, ERNAKULAM, ERNAKULAM
PETITIONER:
1. EDWIN JOSEPH K J, AGED 51 YEARS,S/O LATE K J JOSEPH, WINVIHAR
KAITHARAKUZHI,FERRY ROAD, SOUTH CHITTOR P.O, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682027
2. BIJITH DHARAN S, AGED 43 YEARS, S/O B SASIDHARAN, KARIKODU VASATHI,
ELOOR EAST, UDYOGAMANDAL P O,ERNAKULAM, PIN - 683501
3. PRADEEP KUMAR K P AGED 41 YEARS AGED 41 YEARS, S/O LATE PRABHAKARAN
NAIR, KURUPPAM PRAMBIL HOUSE,NADAKKAVU P O, UDAYAMPEROOR, ERNAKULAM,
PIN - 682307
4. SHAN A V,AGED 41 YEARS,S/O A R VIDHYADHARAN, AYINIPPILLY,
THATTAPRAMBU ROAD, PALLURUTHY.P O, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682006
RESPONDENTS/STATE /COMPLAINANT AND DEFACTO COMPLAINANT:
1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF
KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031
2. STATION HOUSE OFFICER, ERNAKULAM TOWN NORTH POLICE STATION, CHITTOOR
RD, KACHERIPADY, ERNAKULAM, KERALA, PIN - 682018
3. MOHAMMED ANEEZ A.M, AGED 43 YEARS, S/O. MUHAMMED BASHHER, ARYAT
HOUSE, VENNALA P.O.,ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682028
This Criminal Misc. case coming on for orders upon persuing the
petition and upon hearing the arguments of SRI.SUVIN.R.MENON, Advocate for
the petitioner and PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for R1 & R2, the court passed the
following:
RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V, J.
-------------------------------------
Crl.M.C No. 5375 of 2023
-------------------------------------------
Dated this the 1st day of August, 2023
ORDER
The petitioner is before this Court seeking to quash the proceedings in
C.C No.529 of 2018 on the file of the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate
Court, Ernakulam.
2. Sri.Suvin R Menon, the learned counsel for the petitioners,
submits that the Crime was registered on 23.4.2005 inter alia under Section
326 of the IPC. After completion of the investigation, Final Report was laid
before the jurisdictional court on 06.07.2005. Almost two decades have
elapsed but owing to the failure of the prosecution to secure the presence of
CWs 1 to 3, the trial has not even commenced. Placing reliance on the
judgment rendered by the Supreme Court in Sreenivasa Gopal v. Union
Territory of Arunachal Pradesh [1988 (4) SCC 36], it is submitted by the
learned counsel that swift justice is sine qua non of Article 21 of the
Constitution of India. Reliance is also placed on the law laid down in
Ramachandra Rao v. State of Karnataka (2002 (4) SCC 578) to highlight
his point. The learned counsel would also refer to the law laid down in
Oomen Koshy v. State of Kerala (1989 (2) KLT 384), and it is argued that
Crl.M.C No. 5375 of 2023
keeping a person in suspended animation for more than 10 years without any
cause cannot be within the spirit of procedure established by law.
3. The learned Public Prosecutor submitted that though the trial has
been delayed for failure to secure the presence of CWs 1 to 3, the fact
remains that the petitioner has also contributed to the delay.
4. I find from the order sheet that from 18.11.2015, the case is
being adjourned to secure the presence of the prime witnesses.
The registry shall get a report from the learned Magistrate as to the
steps that can be taken to expedite the trial and the time frame within which
the case can be disposed of.
Post on 7.8.2023.
Sd/-
RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V,
JUDGE
IAP
