K.T.SANKARAN, K.HARILAL, K.P.JYOTHINDRANATH
Pazhani S/o Chami – Appellant
Versus
State of Kerala – Respondent
K.T. Sankaran, J.
1. A learned single Judge referred these cases for consideration by a Division Bench. When the matter came up before the Division Bench, it was felt that the matter should be considered by a Full Bench. Accordingly, the cases were referred to the Full Bench.
2. The question referred to the Division Bench by the learned single Judge was:
"Whether an appeal from a sentence of fine would abate if no relative of the appellant comes forward to continue to prosecute the appeal?"
3. The learned single Judge doubted the correctness of the decision in Raveendran v. State of Kerala (2015(1) R.C.R.(Criminal) 642 : 2014 (4) KLT 382).
4. In Pradeep v. State of Kerala (2013 KHC 717), interpreting Section 394(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, a Division Bench of this Court (in which Justice K.T. Sankaran was a member) held thus:
"That the appeal will not abate in the case of an appeal from a sentence of fine does not mean that the appeal cannot be disposed of without bringing on record the near relatives of the appellant. It only means that the near relatives of the appellant can continue to prosecute the appeal on getting leave from Court."
5. Later, a learned single Jud
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.