State Of Kerala Represented By Public ... vs K. Karunanidhi
2024 Latest Caselaw 26380 Ker

Kerala High Court

State Of Kerala Represented By Public ... vs K. Karunanidhi on 3 September, 2024

                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                  PRESENT
                 THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C. JAYACHANDRAN
         Tuesday, the 3rd day of September 2024 / 12th Bhadra, 1946
               CRL.M.APPL.NO.1/2023 IN CRL.A NO.1010 OF 2023
                    CRIME NO.03/2011 OF VACB, KOZHIKODE
      CC 12/2014 OF ENQUIRY COMMISSIONER AND SPECIAL JUDGE, KOZHIKODE
APPELLANT/COMPLAINANT:

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

RESPONDENTS/ACCUSED:

     K. KARUNANIDHI, S/O. KRISHNAN,
     S.K BHAVAN, VENKULAM, EDAVA P. O.,
     THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695311.
     (VILLAGE OFFICER, THINOOR VILLAGE),


     Application praying that in the circumstances stated in the
affidavit filed therewith the High Court be pleased to condone the delay
of 141 days in filing the Criminal Appeal in the interest of justice.


     This Application coming on for orders upon perusing the application
and upon hearing the arguments of the PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the petitioner
and of SHRI RAJ CAROLIN V., Advocate for the respondent, the court passed
the following:




                                                                    P.T.O.
                    C. JAYACHANDRAN, J.
   ---------------------------------------------------------
    Crl.M.A. No.1 of 2023 in Crl.A. No.1010 of 2023
                 & Crl.A. No.1010 of 2023
   ---------------------------------------------------------
      Dated this the 03rd day of September, 2024


                           ORDER

A counter has been filed opposing the delay. Learned

counsel for the respondent would submit that the case

originated in the year 2011 and the judgment was rendered

in the year 2022. The respondent/accused was put to

serious prejudice because of the pendency of the

proceedings. It is also submitted that the respondent retired

five years back, but had not received any retiral benefits,

because of the pendency of the proceedings. It was then

submitted by the learned counsel for the respondent that

the instant appeal is an appeal for the sake of it, bereft of

any merits or bonafides. It was submitted that the crucial

ingredient of demand and acceptance could not be proved

by the prosecution, for which reason, the prosecution case

was disbelieved and the accused was acquitted. There is

little chance for reversing the judgment of the trial court,

according to the learned counsel for the respondent. In

such circumstances, it is the submission of the learned

counsel for the respondent not to condone the delay and

to dismiss the appeal.

2. For submission on merits and for hearing on

admission, learned Public Prosecutor seeks time.

Post on 07.10.2024.

Sd/-

C. JAYACHANDRAN

JUDGE SKP/03-09

03-09-2024 /True Copy/ Assistant Registrar