High CourtsSingle Bench(2021) 07 KL CK 0221

A.Soman vs State Of Kerala

High Court Of Kerala · Decided on 19 July 2021

HON’BLE JUDGES
Shircy V, J
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
CRL.REV.PET NO. 803 Of 2020

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

24 paragraphs · 470 words

Shircy V, J

1.

The petitioners are the appellants in Crl.Appl.No.120/2018 on the files of the learned Additional Sessions Judge-VI, Thiruvnananthapuram. They

have filed an appeal before the court below with a delay of 1114 days. The court below by a cryptic order dated 24.1.2020 dismissed the application to

condone the delay and consequently, the appeal also stands dismissed.

2.

Aggrieved by the said order of the court below these petitioners are before this court with this revision petition.

3.

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners as well the learned counsel for the respondents.

4.

The records would reveal that the learned Judicial First Class Magistrate-II, Neyyattinkara in M.C.No.53/2012 passed an order in favour of the

second respondent herein as early as on 11.3.2015. These petitioners who were the respondents in that case were set exparte. Later, with a petition to

condone the delay of 1114 days, the appeal was filed before the Sessions Court and the said petition and the appeal were disposed of by the learned

Additional Sessions Judge-VI as stated above.

5.

The main grievance projected in this revision petition is that the learned Additional Sessions Judge has not considered the reasons stated by these

petitioners to condone the delay in preferring the appeal. Though the petitioners were having sufficient and valid reasons for the delay in preferring the

appeal, that was not considered by the court and by a cryptic order dismissed the same. On going through the materials placed before me, I find some

force in the argument of the learned counsel for the petitioners.

6.

Hence, this revision petition is allowed directing the court below to reconsider the application filed by these petitioners to condone the delay in filing

the appeal and dispose of the same on merits. Therefore the order under challenge in Crl.M.P.No.1187 of 2018 as well in Crl.Appeal No.120/2018 are

hereby set aside and the parties are directed to appear before the court concerned on 10.9.2021.

7.

In this revision petition, as per an order dated 23.3.2021 this Court has directed the petitioners to deposit a sum of Rs.40,000/- on or before

8.4.2021. The said amount was deposited by the petitioners on 7.4.2021 before the Judicial First Class Magistrate-II, Neyyattinkara . The respondent

is permitted to withdraw 50% of the amount deposited by the petitioners, as per the direction of this court. The balance amount can be adjusted or

disbursed as per the direction of the learned Magistrate after disposal of this Crl.M.P as well the Crl.Appeal. Coercive steps shall not be taken against

these petitioners till disposal of the Crl.M.P and the Crl.Appeal.

Both parties are at liberty to address the learned Additional Sessions Judge and submit their version in detail. The learned Additional Sessions Judge

shall dispose of the petition and appeal at the earliest without any delay.