Kerala High Court
Nazarudeen vs State Of Kerala on 6 September, 2024
2024:KER:67103
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C. JAYACHANDRAN
FRIDAY, THE 6TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2024 / 15TH BHADRA, 1946
CRL.MC NO. 7258 OF 2024
CRIME NO.VC 1/06/ALP/2006 OF VACB, ALAPPUZHA, Alappuzha
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED IN CC NO.21 OF 2015 OF
ENQUIRY COMMISSIONER AND SPECIAL JUDGE (VIGILANCE),KOTTAYAM
PETITIONER/PETITIONER/ACCUSED:
NAZARUDEEN
AGED 62 YEARS
S/O ABOOBACKER, EDAPARAMBIL HOUSE, ERUVA P.O.,
KAYAMKULAM, ALAPPUZHA, PIN - 690572
BY ADVS.
AKHIL VIJAY
C.S.AJAYAN
RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS/STATE/COMPLAINANT:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA,
PIN - 682031
2 DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, VACB, ALAPPUZHA
VELLAKKINAR, VAZHICHERY HEAD P.O., ALAPPUZHA, PIN -
688001
BY ADVS.
SRI.A.RAJESH - SPECIAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR (VIGILANCE)
SRI.REKHA S. - SENIOR PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
04.09.2024, THE COURT ON 06.09.2024 PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
Crl.M.C.No. 7258 of 2024
..2..
2024:K2024:KER:67103
O R D E R
Dated this the 6th day of September, 2024
Petitioner is the sole accused in C.C.No.21/2015
pending before the Special Court(Vigilance),
Kottayam. Petitioner filed Annexure-A2 petition
under Rule 19(4) of the Criminal Rules of
Practice, Kerala, seeking a list of statements,
documents and material objects which are not
relied upon by the Investigating Officer for the
purpose of prosecution. The same was dismissed by
Annexure-A3 order of the learned Special Judge,
holding that Rule 19(4) prescribes a substantive
right in the hands of the accused, wherefore, the
amendment incorporating Rule 19(4) to the rules
can only be prospective. On the premise that the
rule does not operate retrospectively, Annexure-A2
application was dismissed, which is under
challenge in this Criminal Miscellaneous Case.
..3..
2024:K2024:KER:67103
2. This Court has considered the same issue in
detail in Crl.M.C.No.6592/2024, wherein this Court
held that the right under Rule 19(4) should be
meaningfully interpreted and the same shall be
afforded to the accused, if the application is
made any time before the commencement of the
trial, thereby meaning the examination of
witnesses. In the instant case, this Court notice
that, Annexure-A2 application was filed in the
month of June, 2024. The case stands posted for
trial on 11.09.2024, as submitted by the learned
Public Prosecutor. Learned Public Prosecutor would
also submit that, all the documents which were
seized/collected during the course of
investigation and all statements recorded have
already been produced, and there exists no
document, statement or material object which is in
the possession of the Investigating agency and
..4..
2024:K2024:KER:67103
which is not sought to be relied upon for the
purpose of prosecution.
3. For the reasons stated in the judgment in
Crl.M.C.6592/2024 and taking note of the
circumstances referred above, Annexure-A3 order is
set aside and Annexure-A2 application is allowed.
There will be a direction to the learned Special
Judge to give an opportunity for the accused in
terms of Rule 19(4) by directing the Investigating
Officer to produce a list of documents, material
objects and statements, which are not relied upon
by the Investigating Officer. If all documents,
statements and material objects seized/collected
have already been produced, irrespective of the
fact whether it is sought to be relied upon or
not, it will be open for the Investigating Officer
to swear to an affidavit to that effect, the
genuineness of which, if questioned, will be
..5..
2024:K2024:KER:67103
considered by the learned Special Judge, in
accordance with law. The Special Judge is also
cautioned to take care of the caveat as contained
in clause (c) of paragraph no.17 of Ponnusamy P.
v. State of Tamil Nadu [2022 SCC Online SC 1543],
so as to ensure that the instant application and
proceedings, if any, therefrom is not a
camouflage/ruse for delaying the trial. Once the
above direction in terms of Rule 19(4) is complied
with, the learned Judge will schedule the matter
for trial immediately thereafter. The petitioner
is directed to co-operate with trial fully and
wholeheartedly.
The Criminal Miscellaneous Case is disposed of, as
above.
Sd/-
C. JAYACHANDRAN
JUDGE
TR
..6..
2024:K2024:KER:67103
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
Annexure A1 A TRUE COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT FILED
BY THE SECOND RESPONDENT IN C.C. 21 OF
Annexure A2 A CERTIFIED COPY OF THE PETITION FILED
BY THE PETITIONER DATED 05.06.2024 IN
BEFORE THE HONOURABLE COURT OF THE
ENQUIRY COMMISSIONER AND SPECIAL JUDGE
(VIGILANCE), KOTTAYAM.
Annexure A3 A CERTIFIED COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED BY
THE HONOURABLE COURT OF THE ENQUIRY
COMMISSIONER AND SPECIAL JUDGE
(VIGILANCE), KOTTYAM DATED 10.07.2024
Annexure A4 A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION ISSUED
BY THE HOME DEPARTMENT OF THE
GOVERNMENT OF KERALA NUMBERED AS G.O.
(RT)NO.1407/2022/HOME DATED 19/05/2022
Annexure A5 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DATED 30/03/2017
IN SUO MOTU WRIT (CRL.) NO. 01/2017
