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

2019 Supreme(Online)(KER) 75266

HIGH COURT OF KERALA
MARY JOSEPH, J
SANU@SEBASTIAN, – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent


Advocates:
SRI.M.J.SANTHOSH, SRI. C.K.PRASAD

ORDER

In this petition, the first accused in the final report laid in Crime No.17 of 2015 of the Excise Enforcement and Anti Narcotic Special Squad, Ernakulam, which has been taken on file by the Additional Sessions Judge-VII, Ernakulam as S.C.No.516 of 2015, has sought for a direction to the said court to recall PW9 and permit the witness to answer the questions put by the cross examiner in the above case.

2. The grievance of the petitioner was that, during trial while PW9 was examined before the court below, the Judge who was recording the evidence intervened and did not permit the counsel for the defence to put certain questions for the reason that, those are irrelevant ones. The deposition of PW9 is appended along with this proceedings as Annexure-A4. The learned counsel has pointed to this Court Page No.15 of the deposition, which is appended to this petition as Annexure 4, wherein, PW9 had admitted his signature in the seizure mahazar marked as Ext.P1 and also in certain other documents marked as Exts.P17 to P23, P24 and P25. According to the learned counsel when PW9 was cross examined the counsel for the defence has put a question based on the signature found in Ext.P1, then

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