Kerala High Court
O.V. Babu vs A.V. Thomas on 7 October, 2009
Author: P.Q. Barkath Ali
Bench: P.Q.Barkath Ali
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 990 of 2001()
1. O.V. BABU
... Petitioner
Vs
1. A.V. THOMAS
... Respondent
For Petitioner :SRI.GRASHIOUS KURIAKOSE
For Respondent :SRI.A.K.BASHEER
The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.Q.BARKATH ALI
Dated :07/10/2009
O R D E R
P.Q. BARKATH ALI, J.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Crl.R.P.No. 990 of 2001
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Dated this the 7th day of October, 2009
O R D E R
The complainant in C.C.No.16 of 1998 of the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class, Mattannur is the revision petitioner. In this revision petition the revision petitioner challenges the order passed by the trial court in C.M.P.No.5533 of 2001 in the above complaint closing the evidence of the prosecution, as per the direction of the Supreme Court in Raj Deo Sharma V. State of Bihar (1998 Crl.L.J. 4596). It is the admitted case that the principle laid down in Raj Deo Sharma's case is overruled by seven Judges Bench of the Supreme Court in Ramachandra Rao V. State of karnataka (2002(2) KLT 189). That being so, the order of the trial court closing the prosecution evidence has to be set aside and the matter has to be remanded to the trial court for fresh disposal.
2. Hence, the impugned order is set aside and the matter is remitted back to the trial court for fresh disposal. The trial court is directed to take into file C.C.No.16 of 1998 and to dispose of the same as early as possible, but not later than six months from the date of receipt of copy of this order.
P.Q. BARKATH ALI, JUDGE mn 2 P.Q. BARKATH ALI, J.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Crl.R.P.No. 207 of 2001=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
O R D E R 8th September, 2009