Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 31262
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
G. GIRISH, J
ARUN ANAND – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
TR.P(CRL.) NO. 77 OF 2024 | SC NO.536 OF 2019
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SRI.K.M.JAMALUDHEEN, SMT.LATHA PRABHAKARAN
For the Respondents: SRI G SUDHEER, P.NARAYANAN, SHRI.SAJJU.S., SENIOR G.P.
The court maintains that safety concerns regarding court appearances do not justify case transfer when the state can ensure proper protection.
Headnote:In this judgment, the petitioner seeks the transfer of a trial court case due to concerns of safety during court appearances from prison. The court finds these concerns unfounded, asserting the state's responsibility to ensure the petitioner's safe transport and that sufficient measures can mitigate these concerns. Consequently, the court dismisses the petition stating clearly that there is no basis for the present request.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. grounds for trial transfer based on safety concerns. (Para 2 , 3) |
| 2. analysis of the petitioner's assertion regarding the likelihood of involvement in other crimes. (Para 4) |
ORDER
No representation from the petitioner.
2. This transfer petition is filed by the convict in SC No. 296/2019 on the files of the Special Court for the Trial of POCSO offences, Thodupuzha, seeking the transfer of SC No. 536/2019 of the First Additional Sessions Court, Thodupuzha, to any of the Sessions Courts at Thiruvananthapuram.
3. The reason stated is that, the petitioner is undergoing imprisonment at Poojappura Central Jail, and that if he is to appear for trial at Thodupuzha, he is likely to be implicated in other crimes at Thodupuzha.
4. The reason stated by the petitioner in the above regard is prima facie unacceptable. It is the responsibility of the State to ensure that the petitioner is produced before the court at Thodupuzha, during the course of trial in SC No. 536/2019, either physically or virtually. When he is taken for attending the trial with sufficient police escort, or when he is permitted to attend the trial through video conferencing, it is not possible to say that there is likelihood of him being implicated in other crimes. Needless to say that there is absolutely no basis for the present petition.
In the result, the petition is hereby dismissed.
