Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
A. BADHARUDEEN, J
NITHIN – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenge to the order under sc/st (poa) act. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. allegations against accused under ipc and sc/st act. (Para 3) |
| 3. arguments for discharge based on lack of evidence. (Para 4) |
| 4. opposition to discharge plea on grounds of prima facie evidence. (Para 5) |
| 5. court's reasoning on necessity of trial despite fir omission. (Para 6) |
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 28th day of January, 2026 Order dated 24.09.2025 in Crl.M.P.No.426/2024 in SC No.1058/2023 on the files of the Special Court under the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 2018 (hereinafter referred to as ‘SC/ST (PoA) Act, 2018’ for short), Ernakulam, is under challenge in this criminal appeal filed under Section 14A of the SC/ST (PoA)
Act, 2018.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the learned Public Prosecutor in detail. Perused the order under challenge. Though notice was served upon the defacto complainant/3rd respondent, as mandated under Section 15A(3) of the SC/ST (PoA) Act, 2018, she did not appear.
3. Here, the prosecution allegation, as could be discerned from the final report, is that the accused, who does not belong to either the Scheduled Caste or Sch
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
