Madras High Court
Albin Jose vs The State Rep By on 11 November, 2022
Crl.O.P.(MD)No.21215 of 2018
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 11.11.2022
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.ANAND VENKATESH
CRL.O.P.(MD)No.21215 of 2018
and
CRL.M.P.(MD)Nos.9801 and 9802 of 2018
Albin Jose ... Petitioner/Sole Accused
Vs.
1.The State rep by
The Inspector of Police,
Kollencode Police Station,
Kanyakumari District.
(Crime No.295/2017) ... 1st Respondent/Complainant
2.K.Ajitha ... 2nd Respondent/Defacto Complainant
PRAYER : Criminal Original Petitions filed under Section 482 of
Cr.P.C., to call for the records relating to the C.C.No.148/2017 on the file
of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Kuzhithurai at Kanyakumari
District and quash the same.
1/5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.(MD)No.21215 of 2018
For Petitioner : Mr.D.Saravanan
For Respondents : Mr.M.Sakthikumar, - for R1
Government Advocate (Crl. side)
ORDER
This petition has been filed challenging the proceedings in
C.C.No.148/2017, pending on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate
No.II, Kuzhithurai at Kanyakumari District.
2.Heard Mr.D.Saravanan, learned counsel appearing for the
petitioner and Mr.M.Sakthi Kumar, learned Government Advocate (Crl.
side), appearing for the State.
3. The grounds raised by the counsel for the petitioner are all
factual in nature and it requires appreciation of evidence and this Court
cannot decide the same in exercise of its jurisdiction under Section 482
of Criminal Procedure Code. It is left open to the petitioner to raise all
the grounds before the Court below and the same shall be considered on
its own merits and in accordance with law. This Court is not inclined to
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.(MD)No.21215 of 2018
interfere with the proceedings pending before the Court below.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner requested this
Court to dispense with the presence of the petitioner. Taking into
consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, the presence of the
petitioner is dispensed with and he shall be represented by a counsel,
who shall cross examine the witnesses on the same day or on the next
hearing date, after they are examined in Chief. The petitioner shall not
dispute the identity of the witnesses. The petitioner shall be present
before the Court below as and when directed by the Court below and
shall be present at the time of questioning under Section 313(1)(b) Cr.P.C
and at the time of passing of the final judgment.
5. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is disposed
of with a direction to the Court below to complete the proceedings in
C.C.No.148/2017 within a period of four months from the date of receipt
of a copy of this order. The trial shall be conducted on a day to day basis
in accordance with the guidelines given by Hon'ble Supreme Court
reported in Vinod Kumar Vs State of Punjab [2015 (1) MLJ (Crl) 288
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.(MD)No.21215 of 2018
SC]. If the petitioner adopts any dilatory tactics, it is open to the trial
Court to insist upon the presence of the petitioner and remand him
to custody as per the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in STATE
OF UTTAR PRADESH VS. SHAMBHU NATH SINGH (JT 2001 (4)
SC 3191). Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are also
closed.
11.11.2022
Index: Yes/No
Internet: Yes/No
Ns
To
1.The Judicial Magistrate No.II,
Kuzhithurai at Kanyakumari District.
2.The Inspector of Police,
Kollencode Police Station,
Kanyakumari District.
3.The Additional Public Prosecutor,
Madurai Bench of Madras High Court,
Madurai.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.(MD)No.21215 of 2018
N.ANAND VENKATESH, J.
Ns
CRL.O.P.(MD)No.21215 of 2018
and
CRL.M.P.(MD)Nos.9801 and 9802 of 2018
11.11.2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
