Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 5468

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
DR. KAUSER EDAPPAGATH, J
MURALIDHARAN – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
CRL.REV.PET NO. 136 OF 2026

Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SMT.DRISYA DILEEP, SMT.SREEDEVI S.
For the Respondents: SRI.K.A. NOUSHAD, SR. PP

Procedural defaults should not prevent substantive justice; courts must consider applications based on merits.

Headnote:The Court analyzed the transfer application concerning SC No.453 of 2019 by the accused petitioners. It found the original dismissal unmeritorious due to the petitioners' absence. Hence, it set aside the impugned order and instructed the sessions court to reconsider the application based on relevant laws and facts. The key issue framed was whether the transfer petition was justly dismissed for default. The Court held that a decision on merits was required, establishing that procedural defaults should not automatically preclude substantial justice. The petitioner's revision was thereby granted.

Table of Content
1. facts leading to transfer petition and its dismissal. (Para 1 , 2)
2. court's observation on the merits of the case. (Para 3)

ORDER

Dated this the 31^st day of January, 2026 Annexure A4 order passed by the Sessions Court, Kollam, dismissing a transfer petition for default is under challenge in this revision petition.

2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Senior Public Prosecutor.

3. The 1^st petitioner is the accused No.2 and the 2^nd petitioner is the accused No.1 in S.C. No.453 of 2019 on the files of the Assistant Sessions Court, Punalur. There is a counter case as C.C. No.609 of 2018 pending before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court- I, Punalur. The petitioners filed a transfer petition to transfer S.C No.453 of 2019 to Additional District and Sessions Court, Punalur for joint trial along with S.C. No.60 of 2025. It was dismissed for default, since the petitioners remained absent on the date of posting. Considering the entire facts and circumstances of this case, I am of the view that the matter requires a disposal on merits.

4. Hence, the impugned order is set aside.

The Sessions Court, Kollam is directed to take back Crl.T.P. No.2834 of 2025 on file and dispose it of, in accordance with law.

Accordingly, the revision petition is allowed.

Sd/-

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 5468

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAMDR. KAUSER EDAPPAGATH, JMURALIDHARAN – AppellantVersusSTATE OF KERALA – RespondentCRL.REV.PET NO. 136 OF 2026

Procedural defaults should not prevent substantive justice; courts must consider applications based on merits.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
DR. KAUSER EDAPPAGATH, J
MURALIDHARAN – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
CRL.REV.PET NO. 136 OF 2026