Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
G.GIRISH, J
KESAVAN AGED 48 YEARS S/O.PARON, EDUKKATTUMKARA (H), KOORACHUNDU AMSOM, ATHIYODI, KOYILANDY TALUK – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. conviction based on concurrent findings and allegations. (Para 1 , 5) |
| 2. importance of legal representation highlighted. (Para 2 , 3) |
| 3. invalidity of judgment without counsel's presence. (Para 4 , 6) |
| 4. case remand for fresh hearing and representation. (Para 7) |
ORDER
This revision is directed against the concurrent findings of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Perambra, and the Additional Sessions Court-II, Kozhikode, in CC No.28/2003 and Crl. Appeal No.310/2005 respectively, convicting and sentencing the petitioners for the commission of offences under Sections 143 , 147, 148, 323 and 324 IPC read with Section 149 .
2. Since there was no representation from the part of the petitioners on repeated posting dates, notices were duly issued to the petitioners intimating that in the event of their further non-representation, the case would be disposed of by this Court in their absence. Still the petitioners did not appear. In the above circumstances, this Court appointed Adv. Mr.Aaron Zacharias Benny, as amicus curiae to represent the petitioners.
3. When the matter was taken up for consideration on 23.01.2026, the learned amicus curiae representing the revisi
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
