Back
Next 
2025 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 36117
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
V. G. Arun, J
SUJIN G.S – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
CRL.MC NO. 3039 OF 2025 | SC NO.677 OF 2022
Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SRI.M.J.SANTHOSH, SHRI.ANTONY PAUL
For the Respondents: PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SRI.M.J.SANTHOSH, SHRI.ANTONY PAUL
For the Respondents: PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
The court emphasizes the importance of procedural compliance in evidence presentation during trials.
Headnote:This judgment addresses the challenge to the trial court's order allowing the recall of a witness, PW34, based on the non-availability of cloned copies of compact discs. The court noted that documents were furnished to the petitioner during the proceedings. The Crl.M.C. was deemed infructuous and subsequently closed. The court's findings highlight procedural compliance regarding evidence presentation.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenge to trial court order on evidence. (Para 1) |
| 2. compliance with evidence procedure noted. (Para 2) |
ORDER
Dated this the 1st day of July, 2025 The challenge in this Crl.M.C. is against Annexure A5 order by which the trial court allowed the petition to recall PW34 filed by the Public Prosecutor. The challenge was primarily on the ground that cloned copies of the compact discs, which were proposed to be marked through PW34, were not made available to the petitioner in advance.
2. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that, pending this Crl.M.C., print out of the documents were furnished to the petitioner.
The above submission is recorded. The Crl.M.C.
