High CourtsSingle Bench(2024) 03 KL CK 0180

Adv. Vishnu Sunil Panthalam vs State Of Kerala

High Court Of Kerala · Decided on 20 March 2024

HON’BLE JUDGES
K.Babu, J
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
Writ Petition (C) No.5823 Of 2024

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

10 paragraphs · 395 words

K.Babu, J

1.

The prayers in the Writ Petition are as follows:-

(i) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order or direction directing the 2nd respondent to submit the FSL report in Crime No.908/2023 of Kollam West Police Station, Kollam City within a period of three weeks.

(ii) Declare  that  the  delay  on  the  part  of  the  2nd respondent in submitting the FSL report in Crime No.908 of 2023 of Kollam West Police Station, Kollam City is illegal.

(iii)Issue such other writ, order or direction as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit in the facts and circumstances of the case.

2.

The petitioner is arrayed as the sole accused in Crime No.908 of 2023 of Kollam West Police Station. The offences alleged against the petitioner are punishable under Sections 294(b) and 323 of the IPC and Sections 3(1)(j), 3(1)(s) and 3(2)(va) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.

3.

The prosecution case is that on 28.08.2023 at 11.30 am, the petitioner showered abusive words on the defacto complainant and voluntarily caused hurt to him. It is further alleged that the petitioner abused the defacto complainant by calling his caste name.

4.

The petitioner relies on the CC TV footage of the relevant day to show that the allegations are false. It is submitted that the petitioner had submitted the CCTV footage to the investigating agency which forwarded the same for analysis to the Forensic Science Laboratory. The grievance of the petitioner is that the inordinate delay in getting report from the Forensic Science Laboratory causes prejudice to him. The learned Public Prosecutor submitted that respondent No.2 has not submitted any response on the time required for the analysis of the CCTV footage.

5.

It is submitted that the delay in the analysis of the CCTV footage may even affect the credibility of the report of the Forensic Laboratory. The learned counsel for the petitioner relied on the decisions of this Court in B.A.No. 11291 of 2023 (Sanjay Oraon v. State of Kerala) and B.A.No.2722 of 2022 (Aneeshkutty v. State of Kerala) to substantiate his contentions.

Having regard to the circumstances brought out on record, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing respondent No.2 to submit the report within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment.