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

2025 Supreme(Ker) 294

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
V.G.ARUN, J.
Abhil C.R S/o Renjith Kumar – Appellant
Versus
State Of Kerala – Respondent


Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : C.S.MANU, S.K.PREMRAJ, V.SARITHA, DILU JOSEPH, C.A.ANUPAMAN, T.B.SIVAPRASAD, NEETHU.K.SHAJI, C.Y.VIJAY KUMAR, MANJU E.R., ALINT JOSEPH, PAUL JOSE, DAINY DAVIS, MAHESH KUMAR K.
For the Respondent: SRI. M.C. ASHI, PP.

Judgement Key Points

The court's decision emphasizes the importance of facilitating access to justice through the use of Video Conferencing Rules, especially in circumstances where physical presence is challenging for the accused. It recognizes that an accused can appear through Counsel for plea recording, provided certain conditions are met to ensure the integrity of the proceedings.

Specifically, the court has clarified that an accused wishing to appear virtually must submit a formal application requesting such mode of appearance. This application should include an undertaking by the accused that he will not dispute his identity and that his Counsel will be present to make the plea on his behalf, if applicable (!) . The purpose of this requirement is to maintain the authenticity of the proceedings and prevent any disputes regarding the accused’s identity.

Furthermore, the court has indicated that, in appropriate cases, the plea can be recorded through a Counsel, which can be facilitated via virtual appearance. The accused must give a clear undertaking that he will not contest his identity and that his Counsel will be available throughout the proceedings. This ensures that the proceedings are conducted smoothly and that the rights of all parties are protected (!) .

In summary, the argument for allowing virtual appearance or plea recording through Counsel hinges on the submission of a proper application accompanied by an undertaking by the accused. This approach balances the need for access to justice with the necessity of safeguarding the integrity and authenticity of the judicial process.


ORDER :

Petitioner is the 6th accused in S.C. No.1490 of 2023 on the files of the Additional Sessions Judge-I, Ernakulam. The case originated from Crime No.382 of 2023 registered at the Thrikkakara Police Station for the offence punishable under Section 22(c) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (NDPS Act).

2. The petitioner was granted bail by this Court as per order dated 30.09.2023. Subsequently, at the request of the petitioner, trial court granted permission to travel to the United Kingdom for pursuing his studies in M.Sc. Digital Marketing at the Coventry University, U.K. The case was posted on 12.03.2024 for framing of charge and the petitioner being absent, trial court framed and read over charges to the other accused. The case was then posted to 16.03.2024 for framing charges against the petitioner. Even though, petitioner appeared through Video Conferencing mode on that day, the charge was not read over to him. The charge was not read over on the subsequent dates also, as the petitioner was not present in person. The court also proceeded to issue non-bailable warrant against the petitioner due to his absence. This Crl.M.C is hence filed, seeking the f

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