State Of Kerala Represented By The ... vs Midhun Kumar
2024 Latest Caselaw 10101 Ker

Kerala High Court

State Of Kerala Represented By The ... vs Midhun Kumar on 5 April, 2024

                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                  PRESENT
                 THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.G. AJITHKUMAR
           Friday, the 5th day of April 2024 / 16th Chaithra, 1946
                CRL.M.APPL.NO.1/2024 IN CRL.A NO. 255 OF 2024
               CRIME NO.1359/2016 OF Perumbavoor Police Station
            SC 600/2021 OF FAST TRACK SPECIAL COURT , PERUMBAVOOR
PETITIONER/APPELLANT/COMPLAINANT:

     STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF
     KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031

RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT/ACCUSED:

     MIDHUN KUMAR, S/O VINODAN, VETTIKKUNNEL HOUSE, PERALASSERY MAKKERY
     VILLAGE, KANNUR, PIN - 670622

     Application praying that in the circumstances stated in the
affidavit filed therewith the High Court be pleased to condone the delay
of 253 days in filing the Criminal Appeal before this Hon'ble Court.
     This Application coming on for orders upon perusing the application
and the affidavit filed in support thereof, and upon hearing the arguments
of the PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the petitioner, the court passed the
following:
                                 P.G. AJITHKUMAR, J.
     -----------------------------------------------------------
                               Crl.Appeal No 255 of 2024
     -----------------------------------------------------------
                    Dated this the                 5th day of April, 2024
                                              O R D E R

There is delay of 253 days in filing this appeal.

Administrative exigencies are stated to be the reason for

the delay.

Despite giving notice, none representing the

respondent, chose to object the petition. Having heard the

learned Public Prosecutor, I am satisfied that the reason

for delay in filing this appeal is satisfactorily

explained. The petition stands allowed.

Crl.Appeal No 255 of 2024

The Trial Court found the respondent not guilty

mainly for the reason that evidence of PW1, the victim, is

unreliable on account of the discrepancies and delay. When

the findings are based on the appreciation of oral

evidence alone, it is appropriate to grant leave to appeal

against impugned judgment. Hence leave is granted.

Appeal is admitted. Issue notice to the respondent

by speed post returnable by 4 weeks. List on 29.07.2024.

Sd/-

P.G. AJITHKUMAR, JUDGE SM

05-04-2024 /True Copy/ Assistant Registrar