Back
P. V. KUNHIKRISHNAN
VINOD S/O VELAYUDHAN NAIR – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
ORDER :
1. This Criminal Miscellaneous Case is filed to quash the proceedings in C.C. No. 87/2017 on the file of the Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Thrissur.
2. I am sitting in the jurisdiction of the final hearing of Writ Petitions and Criminal Miscellaneous Cases from January 2024 onwards. There is a general tendency from the trial courts and other tribunals to adjourn cases if there is a submission to the effect that there is a stay order from the High Court. If there is such a submission, even without getting a copy of the stay order or an affidavit from the parties to that effect, the courts and tribunals are adjourning the matter recording that the matter is stayed by the High Court. I have come across several such cases in which the presiding officers of courts and tribunals are adjourning cases for years based on oral submission that, there is stay from the High Court, when no such orders are passed by this Court. With technological advancements, anybody can check the status of the High Court cases by simply browsing the High Court website. But without doing the same, the courts, tribunal and other judicial forums are adjourning the matter, relying only on the submissions o
Courts must verify the existence of stay orders before adjourning cases to prevent undue delays in the judicial process.
Court emphasizes timely resolution of criminal cases while upholding trial court decisions and rejecting petitions to quash proceedings based on previous dismissals.
The court can exercise its inherent power to recall an order if it was obtained by abuse of the process of court and had become a nullity in the eye of the law.
The petitioner in a criminal matter may seek discharge before the trial court if charges are not framed, highlighting judicial discretion and procedural adherence.
The Supreme Court's ruling on the 'six months stay' mandate applies to all pending civil and criminal cases, emphasizing the need for expeditious disposal of cases and the adverse effects of court-gr....
The dismissal of a quashing petition reserves the right for the petitioner to challenge the final report or seek discharge before the appropriate court.
The court upheld procedural rights allowing petitioners to challenge the final report or seek discharge before jurisdictional court post-dismissal of quashing application.
The petitioner retains the right to challenge the final report or seek discharge despite the dismissal of the case.
The petitioner retains the right to challenge the final report in the trial court after dismissal of the quash petition.
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
