Back
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS
Muhammed Abdulla Sha – Appellant
Versus
State Of Kerala – Respondent
ORDER :
Actus curiae neminem gravabit -“An act of court shall not prejudice a person”, is one of the well known axioms followed by the Indian legal system. Petitioners claim benefit of the above maxim for redressal of their grievance.
2. Petitioners are accused Nos.2, 5 and 6 in S.C.No.309/2019 on the files of the Additional Sessions Court-I (Special Court), Pathanamthitta. The offences alleged are under Sections 304 and 308 r/w Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.
3. Initially, the above referred case was pending before the Sessions Court, Pathanamthitta from where it was made over to the Additional Sessions Court-I and then to the Additional Sessions Court-IV. On 23.11.2022, the case was adjourned to 13.01.2023 and the proceedings reveal that petitioners were represented through their Advocate. However, on 01.12.2022, the case was suo motu advanced and awaiting orders from the Sessions Judge, posted the case to 13.01.2023. Again, the case was advanced suo motu on 12.12.2022 and transferred to Special Court dealing with Protection of Child Rights Act, i.e. the Additional Sessions Court-I, Pathanamthitta with the same posting date as 13.01.2023'.
4. Petitioners contend that on 13
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement to adhere to the prescribed procedure under Section 446 CrPC for the forfeiture of surety bonds, including issuing show cause notic....
The main legal point established is that apprehension of injustice must be reasonable and substantiated, and passing of an unfavorable order cannot be a ground for transferring a case.
The court reaffirmed that the forfeiture of a bond under Section 446 of the CrPC requires adherence to procedural safeguards, including notice and an opportunity for the accused to respond, to uphold....
The apprehension of not getting a fair and impartial trial must be reasonable and not imaginary.
A surety must be afforded an opportunity to contest the imposition of a penalty for non-production of an accused, adhering to principles of natural justice.
Allegations of bias require substantial evidence to justify the transfer of civil suits; mere apprehension of bias is insufficient, maintaining the integrity of judicial officers is paramount.
The court's decision emphasized that the absence of justifiable grounds for transfer, the presiding officer's judicial conduct, and the petitioner's own actions influenced the dismissal of the transf....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
