SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2014 Supreme(Ker) 758

P.UBAID
V. A. ROCKY – Appellant
Versus
PAVUNNI – Respondent


Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : SRI. C.D. DILEEP, SMT. SHYLAJA VARGHESE.
For the Respondent: GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. P. MAYA.

JUDGMENT

The petitioner herein is the 12th defendant in O.S No.518/1994 before the Munsiff's Court, Irinjalakkuda. During the proceeding he filed an application under Section 340 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for enquiry and action against the plaintiff and the other defendants. After enquiry, the learned Munsiff rejected the application and also directed the petitioner to pay a cost of 1,000/- to the respondents therein, under Section 342 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner preferred a Criminal Appeal before the Court of Session, Thrissur as Crl.A No.82/2014. At the initial stage nobody noticed that such an appeal is not maintainable. Section 341 of the Code of Criminal Procedure provides that any person aggrieved by an order under Section 340 of the Code of Criminal Procedure will have to file appeal to the court to which the court that passed orders is subordinate within the meaning of Sub Section 4 of Section 195 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. This material aspect was found out by the learned Additional Session Judge, Thrissur when the appeal came up for hearing. Finding that Criminal Appeal is not maintainable against an order





Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top