SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 13239

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
C.S.DIAS, J
VISHNU VIKRAMAN – Appellant
Versus
NARCOTIC CONTROL BUREAU – Respondent
CRL.MC NO. 131 OF 2026|S.C.NO.1065 OF 2022



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SRE.SUMAN CHAKRAVARTHY, SMT.K.R.RIJA, SMT.BREJITHA UNNIKRISHNAN, SHRI.SUDEESH K.E., SHRI.PRAHLADH S.P.
For the Respondents: SHRI.R.VINU RAJ, SHRI.K.K.SUBEESH, SMT.SEETHA.S

The Court directed that the application for permanent exemption be considered in accordance with law, emphasizing the ongoing appeal and acquittal.

Headnote:This case concerns the filing of a Criminal Miscellaneous Case to quash a complaint leading to a registered session case, alleging acquittal of co-accused. The Court noted the pendency of an appeal against the acquittal and declined to quash on that basis. It directed the Trial Court to expedite review of the petitioner's application for permanent exemption based on employment abroad.

Result: The Court directed the Trial Court to consider the application for permanent exemption in accordance with the law.

Table of Content
1. filing of criminal miscellaneous case to quash a complaint. (Para 1)
2. mention of appeal pending against judgment. (Para 2)
3. court's reluctance to quash without final judgment. (Para 3 , 4)
4. directive to consider permanent exemption application. (Para 5)

O R D E R

Dated this the 23rd day of February, 2026 The Criminal Miscellaneous Case is filed to quash Annexure-2 complaint, which led to the registration of S.C.No.1065/2022 on the file of the Additional Sessions Court-II, Thiruvananthapuram (‘Trial Court’, in short), and originated from O.R.No.01/2022/NCB/SZ/COK registered by the Narcotic Control Bureau, Kochi, on the assertion that the co-accused in the crime have been acquitted by Annexure-3 judgment by the Trial Court.

2. Heard.

3. The learned counsel for the respondent submits that, assailing Annexure-3 judgment, Crl.Appeal No.1999/2025 has been filed before this Court and the same is pending consideration.

4. In view of the pendency of the above Appeal, I am not inclined to exercise the inherent power of this Court, to quash the proceedings on the strength of Annexure-3 judgment.

5. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, consequent to the orders passed by this Court, the petitioner surrendered before the Trial Court and got himself enlarged on bail. As the petitioner is employed abroad, he filed an application for his permanent exemption. Hence, this Court may direct the Trial Court to consider and dispose of the application for permanent exemption in accordance with law.

Taking into consideration the limited relief now prayed, by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the Crl.M.C is disposed of, by directing the Trial Court to consider and dispose the application filed by the petitioner for permanent exemption in accordance with law and as expeditiously as possible.

Sd/-

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top